GuardRails-MCP

io.github.TAM-DS由 GitHub 帳號 TAM-DS 發布v0.1.1更新於 Oct 24, 2026

Local prompt regression tracker with six fictional cases and evidence for human review.

發布方自己的服務:Job Bot by Agent Rails

已驗證STDIO僅桌面開發者工具AI 與機器學習

概覽

AI 產生的概覽

本機 stdio MCP 伺服器,以六個虛構外聯案例比較基準與候選提示詞,並保留提示詞回歸紀錄供人工審閱。

可以做什麼
  • 列出六個帶標籤的虛構外聯案例及其預期行為
  • 執行零成本示範,比較基準提示詞與刻意退化的候選提示詞
  • 列出已儲存的評測執行紀錄,並讀取單次執行詳情,包括提示詞雜湊、套件快照、評測器版本、輸出與逐案例檢查
  • 提供片語比對標記與審閱指引,讓人判斷比對結果是否真的構成不安全陳述
適用情境
適合在代理式或大模型工作流程中修改提示詞、希望在人工簽核前留下可重複、可審閱之變更與回歸證據的團隊。也適合需要索取發布證據的 AI 保障、風險與治理審閱人員,但不作為自動核准發布之用。
執行需求
以本機 Python 程序執行(需 Python 3.11 以上),從 PyPI 安裝並在用戶端設定為 stdio 伺服器。需設定環境變數 GUARDRAILS_DATA_DIR,指向可寫入的絕對目錄以保存執行紀錄。示範模式與 MCP 工具不需 API 金鑰;命令列即時執行則需 OPENAI_API_KEY 與 OPENAI_MODEL。
安裝前請注意
MCP 呼叫端無法啟動付費即時執行,但命令列可以:即時執行會消耗 API 額度,須加上 --acknowledge-cost,且沒有全域每日消費上限。本機 SQLite 中的紀錄可被編輯,並非不可竄改的稽核封存。六個案例的套件規模小且公開,提示詞可能對其過度擬合,檢查也不保證事實支撐或通用注入防護。含 OPENAI_API_KEY 的 .env 不要提交到版本控制。

安裝

在 SourceWeft 中

  1. 開啟 儀表板中的 GuardRails-MCP,將其新增到工作區。
  2. 為需要使用其工具的對話啟用該服務。

Desktop only,透過 STDIO。 STDIO 服務會啟動本機處理程序,因此需要 SourceWeft 桌面主機。

其他 MCP 客戶端

參照 儲存庫 中的啟動說明。

README

GuardRails-MCP

Did the prompt change actually make things better?

A small evaluation and prompt-regression tracker with a local MCP interface. Compare two prompts on six labeled fictional outreach cases, inspect failures and usage, and retain evidence for a human release decision.

v0.1.1 · local prototype · no deployment authority · no automated email

Published October 16, 2026: PyPI v0.1.1 · Official MCP Registry record. Registration establishes listing and ownership checks, not security certification.

Why this exists

Prompt changes often ship without evidence. A prompt is edited, a few outputs look fine, and it goes live. GuardRails-MCP gives a team a repeatable, reviewable record of what changed and what broke before a human signs off.

Who it is for: teams building agentic or LLM workflows that need release evidence, and the AI assurance, risk, and governance reviewers who have to ask for it.

What it is not: an approval authority. It produces evidence. A person makes the release decision.

How it works

mermaid
flowchart LR    A[Baseline prompt] --> C[Six labeled cases]    B[Candidate prompt] --> C    C --> D[Deterministic checks]    D --> E[Run record: prompt hashes, suite hash, evaluator version, outputs]    E --> F{Phrase match only?}    F -- yes --> G[Flag: review required]    F -- no --> H[Pass or hard fail]    G --> I[Human reviews evidence]    H --> I    I --> J[Release decision<br/>outside this tool]

Governance at a glance

Enforced by codeLeft to a human
Schema, labeled decision, empty holds, nonempty drafts, reference presence, source-ID membership, short forbidden-pattern listThe release decision
Live runs bounded to at most 12 calls (24 or 36 with repeats), 2,000 output tokens per call, 45-second timeout, no automatic retriesJudging whether a phrase match is a real unsafe claim
Paid live runs require --acknowledge-cost; MCP callers cannot launch themClaim coverage and factual support
Four local MCP tools only: no arbitrary file reads, shell commands, deployments, or approvalsAdding held-out cases and checking for overfitting
Each run records prompt texts and hashes, suite snapshot and hash, evaluator version, model, outputs, and per-case checksRecord retention and immutability (local records are editable)
Provider failures are reported separately from prompt regressionsSpending limits across days (there is no global daily cap)

NIST AI RMF 1.0 mapping (illustrative)

This describes the design of a small evaluation prototype. It is not compliance, certification, or coverage of an entire framework. The full table, including OWASP LLM Top 10 lenses, is in docs/GOVERNANCE.md.

FunctionImplemented evidence or controlKnown gap
GovernDocumented evaluation boundary; MCP cannot authorize deployment or spend API creditsNo authenticated roles, assigned organizational owner, or policy enforcement
MapSix labeled fictional outreach cases and explicit intended behaviorNo stakeholder or impact assessment; only one workflow
MeasureCase checks, provenance snapshots, latency and returned token counts, paired regressionsNo semantic truth verifier, confidence intervals, comprehensive adversarial set, or live accuracy benchmark
ManageExplicit CLI cost opt-in, request and output limits, error visibilityNo daily budget, monitoring or alerting, automatic remediation, or release gate

Dashboard preview

[GuardRails-MCP dashboard with seeded comparison results and recorded evaluator version]

Seeded demo using six fictional cases: baseline 6/6, deliberately regressed candidate 3/6. These are hand-authored fixtures, not measured model performance.

Recorded-run details, review guidance, and known gaps

[Recorded-run metadata with review guidance and known gaps]

The interface keeps evaluator version, prompt provenance, review guidance, and known gaps visible. This screenshot shows the guidance and run metadata; it does not display an individual phrase-match assessment.

Start with the no-cost demo

Python 3.11+, in an activated virtual environment:

python -m pip install "guardrails-mcp[dashboard]==0.1.1"guardrails run --mode demoguardrails-dashboard

Open http://127.0.0.1:7861. Demo results are hand-authored: baseline passes 6/6; a deliberately regressed candidate passes 3/6. This tests the scoring and reporting path, not model performance. Gradio runs locally; no Hugging Face account or hosting subscription is needed.

Your .env can contain OPENAI_API_KEY and OPENAI_MODEL=gpt-5-mini. No key is needed for demo mode or MCP tools. Never commit .env.

For source development, clone this repository and install with python -m pip install -e '.[dev,dashboard]'.

What it checks

CaseExpected behavior
Supported reporting workflowDraft with source references
Do Not ContactBlock and return no outreach
Missing workflow evidenceHold and return no outreach
Conflicting contact roleHold and return no outreach
Unsupported seller historyAvoid selected invented-history phrases
Instructions inside source textAvoid selected injected promises

Checks validate schema, the labeled decision, empty holds, nonempty drafts, reference presence, source-ID membership, and a short forbidden-pattern list. They do not establish complete claim coverage, factual support, general injection resistance, or semantic equivalence. A test explicitly demonstrates a false claim that these checks miss.

Phrase matches require review

A literal pattern match is not proof of an unsafe claim. New records include phrase_matches with field, pattern, matched text, offsets and surrounding excerpt; review_required; and an assessment of pass, review, or fail. A phrase-only failure receives review; other deterministic failures remain fail even when a phrase also matches. This does not automatically approve negations or quotations.

Raw passed, failures, and regression counts remain conservative and unchanged in meaning: every check must pass. Summary review_only counts identify phrase-only cases within those raw failures. hard_failures excludes phrase matches but does not imply semantic verification. New runs record evaluator version 0.1.1. Existing records are never automatically rescored or rewritten, and old runs lack the new review fields.

See the first live run review for an observed false positive and the limits of its interpretation.

Live comparison — explicit opt-in

guardrails run --mode live --acknowledge-cost

One run makes at most 12 calls (6 cases × 2 prompts), no web search or tools, 2,000 output tokens per call, a 45-second request timeout, and no automatic retries. Optional --repeats 2 or --repeats 3 increases the bound to 24 or 36 calls. There is no global daily spending cap. Inputs include fictional evidence; expected labels and check patterns are withheld from the model.

A weak candidate is provided intentionally, but live regressions are not guaranteed. Edit guardrails_mcp/prompts.py to compare another candidate. Records retain both prompt texts and hashes, suite snapshots and hashes, model identifier, outputs, per-case checks, elapsed time and returned tokens. Treat timings as single-run observations. Failed requests may incur unreported usage. Provider failures are reported separately, not counted as prompt regressions.

Results persist in .guardrails/runs.sqlite3 (override GUARDRAILS_DATA_DIR to share an absolute directory across CLI, MCP, and dashboard). They are editable local records, not an immutable audit archive. Interrupted processes may leave a running record after a hard crash; these are not completed passes.

MCP

Four local stdio tools: list_cases, run_demo, list_runs, get_run. MCP callers cannot launch paid live runs, read arbitrary files, run shell commands, deploy changes, or approve a release. The SDK is constrained to the tested v1 API line (mcp<2); migration to v2 is separate work.

Example configuration for clients supporting the mcpServers format. Replace the paths with your own:

{  "mcpServers": {    "guardrails": {      "command": "/path/to/your/.venv/bin/guardrails-mcp",      "env": {        "GUARDRAILS_DATA_DIR": "/path/to/your/.guardrails"      }    }  }}

No API key belongs in this configuration. Protocol behavior is tested with an MCP SDK client, and the maintainer verified list_cases, run_demo and get_run through the OpenAI desktop app, including at v0.1.1. This is a stdio server, not a hosted ChatGPT connector. Installing through the registry listing has not been tested; see validation.

SignalDesk integration

python scripts/check_signaldesk.py --checkout /path/to/signaldesk

This loads an actual SignalDesk checkout, creates its app against a temporary database, evaluates its Meridian fixture with this evaluator, and verifies the API rejects approval of the suppressed Brightfield fixture. It never opens the real SignalDesk database and makes no model calls. This is an offline integration harness, not a runtime hook or a complete evaluation of SignalDesk's production prompt. The comparison suite uses SignalDesk-style cases, not its full web-research pipeline.

Linux container

docker compose up --build

Dashboard: http://127.0.0.1:7861. Named volume results retains container records independently of your host's .guardrails directory. The container runs as a non-root user and receives no API key by default. A CLI worker can run with docker compose run --rm dashboard guardrails run --mode demo. The maintainer verified the Docker demo and persistence across a container restart. One earlier unexplained container exit (code 137) is documented in validation; its cause is unconfirmed.

Evidence and known gaps

See validation, governance mapping, release notes, and registry listing.

No statistical accuracy estimate, semantic-drift score, model judge, security certification, autonomous continuous watcher, authentication, hosted service, or release gate is claimed. The suite is visible and small; prompt authors can overfit to it. Add held-out cases and human review before using results for consequential decisions.

Roadmap

Not built yet. These are the gaps described above, listed as candidate next steps:

  • Held-out cases kept separate from the visible suite, to reduce overfitting.
  • Optional model-judge check, clearly labeled and kept separate from the deterministic checks.
  • Immutable audit logging, so run records cannot be edited after the fact.
  • Semantic checks for claim coverage and factual support beyond phrase matching.
  • A daily spend cap for live runs.

Tests

python -m pytest -q

License

Licensed under the MIT License. Copyright © 2026 Tracy Anne Griffin Manning.

來源:README.md,提交 24d9590

工具

0
SourceWeft 尚未在沙箱中啟動過該軟體包,因此其工具未知。

版本歷史

1
  1. v0.1.1最新Oct 16, 2026

評分

已滿足適用檢查項的 50%

該評分衡量此收錄條目的完整程度,依據註冊中心條目、端點與公開來源計算得出。它不是對伺服器本身的評價,也不表示伺服器安全或目前可用:可連通性是帶日期的檢查結果,評分也不包含安裝量或使用者評價。

  • 近 30 天內可連通25 分

    請保持端點能夠回應 MCP 握手;SourceWeft 每 30 天探測一次。

  • 已宣告認證方式10 分

    請在註冊中心條目中宣告憑證請求標頭,或保持端點能夠回應探測,以便判定其認證方式。

  • 已列出工具15 分

    請讓伺服器在無憑證時回應 tools/list,或發布可在沙箱中無憑證啟動的軟體包。

  • 描述必需15 分
  • 圖示10 分
  • 文件15 分
  • 授權條款10 分

其他 Rails 整合