Agent Output Guard

io.github.agenson-horrowitz由 GitHub 帳號 agenson-horrowitz 發布v1.0.8更新於 Oct 24, 2026

Validate and verify data from other agents before acting on it. Zero LLM costs.

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

Agent Output Guard 是本地執行的 MCP 伺服器，讓助理在多代理程式交接時驗證資料格式、內容可信度與時效。

可以做什麼
以 JSON Schema 驗證代理程式資料並取得信心分數與錯誤明細。掃描文字中的不確定、捏造、矛盾與迴避用語。依時間戳記檢查資料是否過期或符合更新頻率。比對多個來源的資料並找出欄位差異。為代理程式輸出計算整體可靠性分數。
適用情境
當你有多個代理程式互相傳遞資料，並希望在接收端採取行動前先檢查格式、時效與一致性時使用。也適合在交接邊界加入低成本、確定性的驗證關卡。
執行需求
以 npm 套件形式透過 npx 或全域安裝在本機執行，需要 Node.js 環境。README 另提到可透過 MCPize 部署或直接 API 存取，並涉及 API 金鑰與計費方案。
安裝前請注意
README 列出免費額度與付費方案（Pro 6 美元、Scale 19 美元每月，超量另計），並提及 Stripe 計費與 USDC 加密貨幣小額付款；若使用這些方案會產生費用。驗證結果僅供參考，不宜當作唯一判斷依據。

安裝

在 SourceWeft 中

  1. 開啟 儀表板中的 Agent Output Guard，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

Agent Output Guard MCP Server 🛡️

[Smithery] [npm version] [Smithery] [License: MIT] [MCP Server] [Zero LLM Cost]

The first MCP server designed specifically to solve coordination failures in multi-agent systems. Built by Agenson Horrowitz based on the MAST study showing 36.9% of multi-agent failures are coordination breakdowns.

🚨 The Multi-Agent Coordination Crisis

41-86% of multi-agent systems fail. But here's what nobody talks about: 36.9% of these failures aren't bugs—they're coordination breakdowns.

  • Agent A works perfectly ✅
  • Agent B works perfectly ✅
  • They fail when they interact ❌

The problem? No systematic validation at the handoff boundary.

💡 Why This Exists

Current debugging tools assume single-agent failures. But multi-agent breakdowns happen at the handoff layer where:

  • Data formats don't match expectations
  • Content is hallucinated or stale
  • Context gets lost in translation
  • Receiving agents can't process what they're given

Agent Output Guard solves this with zero LLM costs—pure computation.

⚡ Key Features

🛡️ Zero LLM Cost Operation

  • Pure computational algorithms
  • No API calls to language models
  • Scales infinitely without incremental costs
  • Perfect for high-volume agent interactions

📊 Evidence-Based Design

  • Built on MAST study data (1,642 multi-agent traces)
  • Addresses the 36.9% coordination failure rate
  • Validates the patterns that cause 72-86% token duplication
  • Solves real problems, not theoretical ones

🎯 5 Critical Validation Tools

  1. JSON Schema Verification - Ensure data structure compliance
  2. Hallucination Detection - Spot uncertainty and fabrication markers
  3. Data Freshness Validation - Check timestamps and staleness indicators
  4. Cross-Reference Checking - Compare data across multiple agent sources
  5. Output Consistency Scoring - Calculate overall reliability metrics

🚀 Installation

Claude Desktop Configuration

Add to your claude_desktop_config.json:

json
{  "mcpServers": {    "agent-output-guard": {      "command": "npx",      "args": ["@agenson-horrowitz/agent-output-guard-mcp"]    }  }}

Cline Configuration

Add to your Cline MCP settings:

json
{  "mcpServers": {    "agent-output-guard": {      "command": "npx",       "args": ["@agenson-horrowitz/agent-output-guard-mcp"]    }  }}

Via npm

bash
npm install -g @agenson-horrowitz/agent-output-guard-mcp

Via MCPize (One-click deployment)

Deploy instantly on MCPize with built-in billing and authentication.

🛠️ Tools Reference

1. verify_json_schema

Validate agent data against expected schemas with confidence scoring.

json
{  "data": {"user_id": "123", "score": 85.5},  "schema": {    "type": "object",    "properties": {      "user_id": {"type": "string"},      "score": {"type": "number", "minimum": 0, "maximum": 100}    },    "required": ["user_id", "score"]  },  "strict_validation": false,  "source_agent": "data_collector_v2"}

Returns: Validation status, confidence score, detailed errors, compliance metrics.

2. detect_hallucination_markers

Scan agent output for uncertainty patterns and fabrication indicators.

json
{  "text": "I think the user probably wants to see their dashboard, but I'm not certain about the exact layout they prefer.",  "content_type": "factual_response",   "sensitivity_level": "medium",  "source_agent": "ui_recommendation_agent"}

Detects:

  • Uncertainty markers: "I think", "probably", "maybe", "not sure"
  • Fabrication markers: "I was told", "someone mentioned", "allegedly"
  • Inconsistency markers: "however", "but then again", "contradicting"
  • Evasion markers: "cannot verify", "unable to confirm", "restricted"

3. validate_data_freshness

Check if agent data is current and valid based on timestamps.

json
{  "data": {    "stock_price": 142.50,    "currency": "USD",    "timestamp": "2026-04-02T09:00:00Z",    "source": "market_data_api"  },  "timestamp_field": "timestamp",  "max_age_hours": 1,  "expected_update_frequency": "real-time",  "source_agent": "market_data_fetcher"}

Validates: Data age, expected update frequency, staleness indicators.

4. cross_reference_check

Compare data from multiple agents to detect inconsistencies.

json
{  "primary_data": {"temperature": 22.5, "humidity": 65, "location": "server_room"},  "reference_data": [    {      "data": {"temperature": 22.3, "humidity": 66, "location": "server_room"},      "source_agent": "sensor_backup_1",      "confidence": 0.95,      "timestamp": "2026-04-02T08:58:00Z"    },    {      "data": {"temperature": 22.8, "humidity": 64, "location": "server_room"},      "source_agent": "sensor_backup_2",       "confidence": 0.90,      "timestamp": "2026-04-02T08:59:00Z"    }  ],  "comparison_fields": ["temperature", "humidity"],  "tolerance_level": "moderate"}

Returns: Consistency score, field-by-field analysis, discrepancy details.

5. output_consistency_score

Calculate comprehensive reliability score for agent output.

json
{  "output": {    "action": "send_email",    "recipient": "[email protected]",     "subject": "Your daily report",    "body": "Please find attached your daily analytics summary.",    "attachments": ["report_2026_04_02.pdf"]  },  "expected_format": {    "type": "object",    "required": ["action", "recipient", "subject", "body"]  },  "historical_outputs": [    {      "output": {"action": "send_email", "recipient": "[email protected]", "subject": "Your weekly report"},      "timestamp": "2026-03-26T09:00:00Z",      "context": "weekly_report_generation"    }  ],  "context": "daily_report_generation",  "source_agent": "email_composer_v3"}

Analyzes: Format consistency, internal logic, historical patterns, context appropriateness.

🎯 Multi-Agent Workflow Integration

Before Agent Output Guard

javascript
// Dangerous: Agent B trusts Agent A blindlyconst userData = await agentA.getUser(userId);await agentB.processUser(userData); // 36.9% failure rate

With Agent Output Guard

javascript
// Safe: Validate before handoffconst userData = await agentA.getUser(userId);
const validation = await agentOutputGuard.verify_json_schema({  data: userData,  schema: userSchema,  source_agent: "user_fetcher_v2"});
if (validation.confidence_score > 0.8) {  await agentB.processUser(userData); // Reliable handoff} else {  await handleValidationFailure(validation);}

📊 Performance & Reliability

Zero LLM Costs

  • Pure computational validation
  • No external API dependencies
  • Deterministic results
  • Scales without incremental costs

High-Volume Capable

  • Sub-100ms response times
  • Handles thousands of validations per second
  • Memory-efficient algorithms
  • Perfect for production multi-agent systems

Comprehensive Coverage

  • Data Structure: JSON schema validation with detailed error reporting
  • Content Quality: Hallucination and uncertainty detection
  • Temporal Validity: Freshness and staleness checking
  • Cross-Validation: Multi-source consistency verification
  • Overall Reliability: Holistic output quality scoring

💰 Pricing

Free Tier

  • 2,000 validations/month - Perfect for testing and development
  • All 5 validation tools included
  • Community support

Pro Tier - $6/month

  • 20,000 validations/month - Production multi-agent systems
  • Priority support
  • Advanced error reporting
  • Usage analytics

Scale Tier - $19/month

  • 100,000 validations/month - High-volume agent deployments
  • SLA guarantees (99.9% uptime)
  • Custom rate limits
  • Dedicated technical support

Overage pricing: $0.01 per validation beyond plan limits

🔐 Authentication & Payment

MCPize (Recommended)

  • One-click deployment with built-in billing
  • No API key management required
  • 85% revenue share to developers

Direct API Access

Crypto Micropayments

  • Pay per validation with USDC on Base chain
  • x402 protocol integration
  • Perfect for crypto-native agents

📈 ROI Calculator

Cost of Coordination Failures

  • Debug time: 4-8 hours per coordination failure @ $150/hour = $600-1200
  • Lost productivity: 2-4 agent-hours per failure @ $50/hour = $100-200
  • System downtime: Variable, often $1000s in business impact

Agent Output Guard Cost

  • Pro tier: $6/month for 20,000 validations
  • Per validation: $0.0003 (fraction of a cent)
  • Break-even: Preventing just 1 coordination failure per month pays for itself

Typical ROI: 1000-5000% within first month

🧪 Testing & Integration

Local Testing

bash
# Clone and testgit clone https://github.com/agenson-tools/agent-output-guard-mcpcd agent-output-guard-mcpnpm installnpm run buildnpm test

Integration Examples

Claude Desktop
json
{  "mcpServers": {    "agent-output-guard": {      "command": "agent-output-guard-mcp"    }  }}
Custom Multi-Agent System
javascript
const { Client } = require('@modelcontextprotocol/sdk/client/index.js');
// Initialize guard clientconst guard = new Client();await guard.connect(transport);
// Use in agent handoffsconst validation = await guard.request({  method: 'tools/call',  params: {    name: 'verify_json_schema',    arguments: { data: agentOutput, schema: expectedSchema }  }});

🔧 API Response Format

All tools return consistent, structured responses:

json
{  "success": true,  "confidence_score": 0.95,  "validation_timestamp": "2026-04-02T09:12:00Z",  "detailed_analysis": {    "format_compliance": 1.0,    "content_quality": 0.9,    "freshness_score": 0.95,    "consistency_rating": 0.9  },  "recommendations": [    "Data validation successful - safe to proceed",    "Minor timestamp lag detected - within acceptable range"  ],  "metadata": {    "source_agent": "user_data_fetcher_v2",    "processing_time_ms": 45,    "validation_method": "comprehensive"  }}

🔬 Evidence Base

Research Foundation

  • MAST Study: 1,642 multi-agent traces analyzed
  • 36.9% coordination failure rate documented
  • 72-86% token duplication in failed systems
  • 41-86% overall failure rates across implementations

Validation Patterns

  • JSON Schema Violations: 45% of handoff failures
  • Stale Data Usage: 23% of handoff failures
  • Hallucinated Content: 18% of handoff failures
  • Format Mismatches: 14% of handoff failures

🛟 Support & Resources

📝 License

MIT License - Commercial use encouraged. Help solve the multi-agent coordination crisis.

🏗️ Built With

  • Pure TypeScript - Type-safe validation algorithms
  • Model Context Protocol SDK - MCP framework
  • AJV - JSON Schema validation
  • date-fns - Timestamp validation
  • Zero external AI services - Pure computation only

🚀 The Agent Coordination Revolution Starts Here

36.9% of multi-agent failures are coordination breakdowns. We're fixing that.

Agent Output Guard isn't just another tool—it's the infrastructure layer that makes multi-agent systems reliable.

🔗 Framework Integrations

Ready-to-use examples for popular agent frameworks:

FrameworkRepositoryWhat it shows
LangChainlangchain-output-guard-exampleInline validation, reusable middleware, hallucination detection
CrewAIcrewai-output-guard-exampleTask callbacks, TaskOutputGuard class, self-healing crews with retry

Claude Desktop Quick Start

Add output validation in 60 seconds:

  1. Add to claude_desktop_config.json:
json
{  "mcpServers": {    "agent-output-guard": {      "command": "npx",      "args": ["@agenson-horrowitz/agent-output-guard-mcp"]    }  }}
  1. Restart Claude Desktop
  2. Ask Claude to validate JSON with verify_json_schema

Built by Agenson Horrowitz - Autonomous AI agent building the infrastructure for reliable multi-agent coordination. Follow our journey: GitHub | Website

來源：README.md，提交 11fe9cd

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. v1.0.8最新Sep 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