Honestcode
概览
作者提供的说明(英文原文)
Deterministic verification for AI coding agents: catches invented APIs and wrong calls.
它能帮你做什么
我们还没有为它写通俗的介绍。下面是我们从注册中心读取到的事实。
- 连接方式: 在你的电脑上运行
- 传输方式: stdio
- 分类: 开发者工具
安装
选择你使用的 AI 应用,然后复制设置。
通过 2/2 项检查 · 在你的电脑上运行
第一步:你用哪个 AI?
选择你用的应用,步骤会显示在下方。
可连接 Claude,但需要先准备
需要先在电脑上安装 Python (uv)(只需一次) · 仅限电脑上的 Claude 应用(Windows 或 Mac),网页和手机不可用
打开电脑版 Claude 应用的设置文件
SettingsDeveloperEdit Config
粘贴这些设置并保存文件
{ "mcpServers": { "honestcode": { "command": "uvx", "args": [ "honestcode" ] } } }退出 Claude 再重新打开
试一试
用 Honestcode 告诉我你能帮我做什么,然后做一件给我看✓ 如果 Claude 说正在使用 Honestcode,或回答中出现 Honestcode 的工具名称,就表示连接成功
菜单名称已于 2026年11月11日 对照 Anthropic 帮助页面核实 · 你的界面可能因版本略有不同
ChatGPT 暂时无法连接 Honestcode
Honestcode 需要安装在你的电脑上,而 ChatGPT 只能连接在网上运行的服务器
你可以改用这些方式
A · 使用能连接 Honestcode 的应用
- 需要先在电脑上安装 Python (uv)(只需一次) · 仅限电脑上的 Claude 应用(Windows 或 Mac),网页和手机不可用
- 需要先在电脑上安装 Python (uv)(只需一次)
- 需要先在电脑上安装 Python (uv)(只需一次)
- 需要先在电脑上安装 Python (uv)(只需一次)
B · 开发者工具 类中能连接 ChatGPT 的其他服务器
从同类中使用较多的里挑选,仅限用地址即可连接、无需密钥的
- Sentry✓ ChatGPT
- Front-End Checklist✓ ChatGPT
- Compiler Explorer✓ ChatGPT
可连接 Claude Code,但需要先准备
需要先在电脑上安装 Python (uv)(只需一次)
打开终端
Mac:按 Command+空格,输入 Terminal · Windows:打开 PowerShell
粘贴这条命令并按 Enter
claude mcp add honestcode -- uvx honestcode在 Claude Code 中输入 /mcp
应能看到 Honestcode 在列表中并显示已连接
试一试
用 Honestcode 告诉我你能帮我做什么,然后做一件给我看✓ 如果 Claude Code 说正在使用 Honestcode,或回答中出现 Honestcode 的工具名称,就表示连接成功
菜单名称已于 2026年11月11日 对照 Anthropic 帮助页面核实 · 你的界面可能因版本略有不同
可连接 Cursor,但需要先准备
需要先在电脑上安装 Python (uv)(只需一次)
在 Cursor 中以 Agent 模式打开 AI 聊天
试一试
用 Honestcode 告诉我你能帮我做什么,然后做一件给我看✓ 如果 Cursor 说正在使用 Honestcode,或回答中出现 Honestcode 的工具名称,就表示连接成功
菜单名称已于 2026年11月11日 对照 Cursor 帮助页面核实 · 你的界面可能因版本略有不同
可连接 VS Code,但需要先准备
需要先在电脑上安装 Python (uv)(只需一次)
在 VS Code 中以 Agent 模式打开 AI 聊天
试一试
用 Honestcode 告诉我你能帮我做什么,然后做一件给我看✓ 如果 VS Code 说正在使用 Honestcode,或回答中出现 Honestcode 的工具名称,就表示连接成功
菜单名称已于 2026年11月11日 对照 VS Code 帮助页面核实 · 你的界面可能因版本略有不同
开发者专用:终端命令和 JSON 设置
安装在电脑上
Claude Code
claude mcp add honestcode -- uvx honestcodeClaude Desktop (claude_desktop_config.json)
{
"mcpServers": {
"honestcode": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"honestcode"
]
}
}
}Cursor (~/.cursor/mcp.json)
{
"mcpServers": {
"honestcode": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"honestcode"
]
}
}
}VS Code (mcp.json)
{
"servers": {
"honestcode": {
"type": "stdio",
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"honestcode"
]
}
}
}这些设置是根据作者在注册中心的条目生成的。如果 README 的写法不同,请以 README 为准。
一览
哪些应用可以使用它
依据这个服务器的连接方式和各应用自己的文档,检查于 2026年11月10日。
在你的电脑上运行,适用于
ClaudeGooseLM StudioMsty StudioCherry StudioCursorVS Code + GitHub CopilotVisual StudioWindsurf (Devin Desktop)ZedKiroClineContinueJetBrains AI AssistantClaude CodeCodex CLIGemini CLIOpenCodenodecodeWarpLibreChatRaycast
它能做什么
它在你的电脑上运行;安装后,工具列表会显示在你的 AI 应用中。
基础检查i
我们检查的是任何人都能看到的信息;我们没有阅读代码。不适用的检查项不计入总数。 · 检查于 2026年11月11日
- ✓ 通过
作者与仓库一致
注册名称已通过 GitHub 账户 Fengrru 验证,该账户拥有此仓库
- ✓ 通过
仍在维护
代码最后更新于17天前
- … 尚未检查
有许可证
我们还没有从 GitHub 读取这个仓库
- – 不适用
端点有响应
它在你的电脑上运行,没有互联网端点
- – 不适用
使用 OAuth 登录
在你的电脑上运行,改用本地设置
- … 尚未检查
工具描述中没有隐藏指令
它在你的电脑上运行;我们只能读取互联网端点的工具列表
讨论
提问、分享技巧或报告无法使用。按“有帮助”数量排序。
用户评价
还没有评价
与“开发者工具”中的其他服务器比较i
- 星标数多于此分类中其他 5747 个服务器的 0%
- 发布到注册中心的时间比此分类中其他 5747 个服务器的 61% 更新
- 基础检查结果等于或优于此分类中其他 5747 个服务器的 100%
与注册中心里这个分类中所有活跃的服务器比较。只有当发布者拥有该仓库时,星标数才计入。
常见问题
Honestcode 安全吗?
它在 2 项适用的基础检查中通过了 2 项。我们没有阅读代码。在添加密钥或令牌之前,请先看看这个服务器要求哪些权限,并使用只具备所需权限的密钥。
它需要哪些密钥或代码?
注册中心没有列出必需的密钥,不过有些服务器会在首次使用时要求你登录。
它在我的电脑上运行还是在云端?
它在你的电脑上运行。你的 AI 应用会在需要时启动它,数据不会经过作者的服务器(除非它自己调用在线服务)。
它还在维护吗?
GitHub 仓库最后更新于17天前,最新版本(0.5.1)于17天前进入注册中心。
哪些应用可以使用它?
支持 MCP 的应用,例如 Claude Desktop、Claude Code、Cursor 和 VS Code。你的电脑上还需要有 Python (uv)。
有什么可以替代它?
同一分类中有:REA, Netdata, Front-End Checklist
替代选择
同一分类中其他作者的服务器,按星标数排序。
如何看卡片:↓ 每周下载量i★ GitHub 星标i三大支柱:评价 · 检查 · 使用情况i更新 = 最新版本发布到注册中心的时间i
Netdata
Real-time infrastructure monitoring with metrics, logs, alerts, and ML-based anomaly detection.
Front-End Checklist
Review frontend code and live pages against 386 quality-gated web development rules.
作者的 README
打开 README
按原文从作者的仓库复制。PopNx MCP 没有审查或背书其内容。HTML、图片和脚本已被移除。链接会离开本站。
HonestCode
The deterministic verification layer for AI coding agents.
Catch invented APIs, undefined symbols, wrong calls, and other code hallucinations before your agent moves on.
The problem
AI coding agents hallucinate. They invent function names, fabricate library APIs, and call methods that do not exist.
HonestCode is the layer that checks what the agent just wrote against the repository it is supposed to be grounded in.
Agent
↓ writes code ↓ HonestCode ↓ evidence ↓ Agent fixes ↓ verified code
No LLM calls. No network. Pure AST + symbol resolution.
Demo
The agent was asked to *"add authentication using the existing UserClient."* It generated:
client.refresh_token()
The real project only has:
class UserClient:
def refresh(self): ... def refresh_access_token(self): ...
HonestCode catches it deterministically:
✗ verification failed — 1 issue in app/login_broken.py
[invented_api] app/login_broken.py:9 UserClient.refresh_token() does not exist. did you mean: refresh_access_token()? available methods:
- refresh()
- refresh_access_token() confidence: deterministic · action: revise
Run it yourself:
cd demos/invented-api
python run.py
Why not just use Ruff / Pyright?
HonestCode is not a replacement — it is a verification layer that answers a specific question: *did the agent's code actually come from this repository?*
| Error | Ruff | Pyright | HonestCode |
|---|---|---|---|
| Syntax error | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Type mismatch | — | ✓ | structural only |
| Undefined symbol | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Invented API | partial | partial | core |
| Wrong method call | — | partial | core |
| Agent-generated API mismatch | — | — | core |
The key difference is repository grounding. Ruff checks the file. Pyright types the call. HonestCode checks whether the call resolves to a real symbol that exists in the codebase the agent is editing. (HonestCode does not do full type inference — its structural checks catch mismatched arities, iterating None, and calling constants, not general type errors.)
What a call site is checked against depends on how the receiver's type is known: an annotation (client: UserClient), a constructor assignment (client = UserClient()), self/cls, and an inline constructor (UserClient().refresh()) are all resolved. A receiver produced by a factory function (make_client().refresh()) is not judged — function signatures carry no return type in the surface model, and guessing there would trade a missed finding for a false one.
Install
One line — no clone, no virtualenv:
claude mcp add honestcode -- uvx honestcode-mcp
uvx fetches the server into an isolated environment on first use; install uv first if you do not have it. From a checkout (to hack on the code, or if you prefer not to use uv):
git clone https://github.com/Fengrru/honestcode
cd honestcode pip install -e . claude mcp add honestcode -- honestcode-mcp
Cursor / VS Code / Claude Desktop: the honestcode install command probes those clients' config files and registers the server for you:
honestcode install # all detected clients
honestcode install --client cursor --dry-run # preview without writing
Requires Python >= 3.10. 100% local.
30-second setup with Claude Code
# Add HonestCode as an MCP server
claude mcp add honestcode -- honestcode-mcp
Or add it manually to your Claude Code config (~/.claude.json on macOS/Linux, %USERPROFILE%\.claude.json on Windows):
{
"mcpServers": { "honestcode": { "command": "honestcode-mcp", "args": [] } } }
Restart Claude Code. You now have two verification tools available:
scan_file(path)— legacy tool, returnsissuesplus the new evidence shape.verify_file(path)— agent-facing tool, returnsstatus,findingswithevidence, and a human-readabletextsummary.
Try prompting Claude:
Add a login endpoint using the existing UserClient, then run verify_file on the
file you just wrote and fix anything it reports.
HonestCode auto-discovers the project root from the file path, indexes the codebase, and returns grounded evidence.
Making it automatic (no prompt discipline required)
MCP tools only run when the model chooses to call them. To make verification unconditional, wire the hook in scripts/claude_hook.py into Claude Code's PostToolUse event — every .py file the agent writes is verified, and a finding blocks the edit with the evidence fed straight back into the conversation:
{
"hooks": { "PostToolUse": [ { "matcher": "Write|Edit", "hooks": [ { "type": "command", "command": "python /absolute/path/to/honestcode/scripts/claude_hook.py" } ] } ] } }
Put that in ~/.claude/settings.json (all projects) or .claude/settings.json (one project). The hook never blocks on its own failures: unreadable input, non-Python files, and verification crashes all exit silently, so it can never turn into a wall that blocks every edit.
Real example
# auth/client.py
class UserClient: def refresh_access_token(self): ...
auth/login.py
from auth.client import UserClient
def login(client: UserClient): client.refresh_token() # invented API
>>> from honestcode.mcp.tools import verify_file
>> verify_file("auth/login.py")
{ "status": "fail", "file": "auth/login.py", "findings": [ { "line": 7, "kind": "invented_api", "symbol": "refresh_token", "owner": "UserClient", "message": "UserClient.refresh_token() does not exist.", "evidence": { "available_methods": ["refresh", "refresh_access_token"], "did_you_mean": "refresh_access_token" }, "confidence": "deterministic", "action": "revise" } ], "text": "✗ verification failed — 1 issue in auth/login.py\n ..." }
Agent output protocol
verify_file returns evidence an agent can act on directly, not just an error message:
{
"status": "fail", "file": "auth/client.py", "line": 42, "kind": "invented_api", "symbol": "refresh_token", "owner": "UserClient", "message": "UserClient.refresh_token() does not exist.", "evidence": { "available_methods": ["refresh", "refresh_access_token"] }, "confidence": "deterministic", "action": "revise" }
How it works
- Auto-index the project (or reuse the cached symbol index).
- Parse the target file with the standard-library
astmodule. - Resolve every call site to a concrete symbol:
- infer the receiver type from annotations, constructors, and imports;
- reconstruct the class's member surface from the repository AST;
- mark the surface as *unknown* when a base class cannot be resolved or the class defines
__getattr__.
- Emit findings with
kind,owner,evidence,confidence, andaction.
The loop is deterministic and auditable.
Scope and limitations
The verifier stays silent wherever it cannot *prove* absence — that is the feature, but it means detection has known boundaries:
- Decorated classes are not judged for invented members. Any class decorator (including
@dataclass) may add or rewrite members, so invented method calls on such classes are not reported. Undecorated classes are fully checked. - Standard-library member calls are not checked.
from typing import TypeVarr(an invented *import*) is caught, butos.path.joinn()(an invented *call* on a real module) is not — third-party and project members are the covered surface. - Factory-function receivers are not judged.
make_client().refresh()is skipped; annotations, constructor assignments,self/cls, and inline constructors (UserClient().refresh()) are resolved. - `undefined_symbol` carries `confidence: high`, not `deterministic`. Only member-surface claims (invented APIs on a fully enumerated class) are provable from the repository; name absence rests on the syntactic binding model and keeps the lower confidence. Variables reassigned across types in one scope are treated as unknown and never judged.
- Graph tools are anchored to the last indexed project.
scan_file/verify_fileresolve the project root per file (including monorepo sub-projects);find_dead_code,explore_call_graph,search_codeand friends operate on the project most recently passed toindex_project. - `check_api` imports the base package on demand — but only when it is genuinely installed (or stdlib). A bare file dropped into the workspace is never imported, so agent-authored code cannot be executed server-side through this tool.
MCP tools
By default scan_file and verify_file are exposed. Set HONESTCODE_TOOLS=all to enable the full set, including:
| Tool | Purpose |
|---|---|
scan_file | Scan a file for invented APIs, undefined calls, and wrong arities. |
verify_file | Return the agent-facing structured evidence protocol. |
index_project | Build or reuse the project symbol index. |
load_project_deps | Load dependency APIs from requirements.txt / pyproject.toml. |
check_symbol | Verify a symbol is defined. |
check_api | Verify a library API call exists. |
validate_types | Structural type checks. |
Dependency manifests (requirements.txt, pyproject.toml) are declared automatically on the first scan, so imports from a dependency that is not installed in the MCP server's interpreter are trusted rather than reported as invented. Set HONESTCODE_AUTO_DEPS=0 to disable that.
See the old tool reference below for the complete list.
Crash-safe side effects
verify_file checks code before it runs. guards/ covers what happens after: an agent that retries a tool call can charge a card twice, and no durable execution engine prevents it — Temporal and Restate both guarantee deterministic replay of *orchestration* and leave exactly-once external effects to the application.
from honestcode.guards import EffectStore, SideEffectGuard, durable_scope
guard = SideEffectGuard(session_id="run-42", store_path=".agent/effects.db")
outcome = guard.run( "charge", target="cus_123", payload={"cents": 4200}, execute=lambda: charge_card("cus_123", 4200), approve_irreversible=True, scope=durable_scope("order-4711", "charge", "cus_123"), )
outcome.executed # False on the retry — a receipt, not a second charge outcome.effect_id # stable across a restart, because the key is on disk
The interesting part is what scope does. Pass it and the effect's identity comes from the scope rather than the session — which is the difference between a retry being recognised and a customer being charged twice, because a restart *is* a new session id. Pass nothing and the guard stays session-scoped.
Refusing is the default direction: an unrecognised action is treated as irreversible rather than idempotent, and irreversible effects need explicit approval. A run that dies between the call and the record leaves the effect executing, and the next attempt reports the outcome as unknown instead of guessing — which is what stops the retry. Scoped effects are recovered with guard.recover(scope=durable_scope(...)), and guard.effects(scope=...) / guard.summary(scope=...) report them; the records live under a namespace d