Spec Driven Development
MCP Server that facilitates spec-driven development workflows, not just Vibe Coding.
Descripción del creador (original en inglés)
Deterministic policy firewall for AI agent tool calls - YAML rules, not a fuzzy risk score.
Estos tres nunca se combinan en una sola puntuación: las opiniones, las mediciones y la popularidad son cosas distintas.
Todavía no escribimos un resumen sencillo para este. Abajo están los datos que leímos del registro.
Elige la app de IA que usas y copia la configuración.
Necesitas
¿Qué app usas?
Elige tu app arriba. La recordamos, así que la próxima vez el botón dirá “Instalar en …”.
Abre Claude Desktop → Settings → Developer → Edit Config y pega esto en claude_desktop_config.json
{
"mcpServers": {
"agent-guardrail": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"guardrail-mcp"
]
}
}
}Ejecuta esto en tu terminal
claude mcp add agent-guardrail -- uvx guardrail-mcpPégalo en .cursor/mcp.json de tu proyecto, o en ~/.cursor/mcp.json
{
"mcpServers": {
"agent-guardrail": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"guardrail-mcp"
]
}
}
}Tu navegador te pide permiso para abrir la app; luego la app muestra la configuración y te pide confirmar. Los valores de las claves quedan vacíos para que los completes tú.
Pégalo en .vscode/mcp.json de tu proyecto
{
"servers": {
"agent-guardrail": {
"type": "stdio",
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"guardrail-mcp"
]
}
}
}Tu navegador te pide permiso para abrir la app; luego la app muestra la configuración y te pide confirmar. Los valores de las claves quedan vacíos para que los completes tú.
Este se ejecuta en tu computadora, y ChatGPT solo puede conectarse a servidores en internet. Elige otra app.
Tu elección se guarda en una cookie en este dispositivo; no necesitas cuenta.
Esta configuración se genera a partir de la ficha del creador en el registro. Si el README dice otra cosa, sigue el README.
Se ejecuta en tu computadora; la lista de herramientas aparece en tu app de IA después de instalarlo.
Revisamos información que cualquiera puede ver; no hemos leído el código. Las revisiones que no aplican no se cuentan. · Revisado el 7 nov 2026
El nombre en el registro se verificó con la cuenta de GitHub rudimentall1, dueña del repo
Todavía no hemos leído este repo en GitHub
Todavía no hemos leído este repo en GitHub
Este se ejecuta en tu computadora; no hay endpoint en internet
Se ejecuta en tu computadora y usa ajustes locales en su lugar
Se ejecuta en tu computadora; solo podemos leer listas de herramientas de endpoints en internet
Comparado con todos los servidores activos de esta categoría en el registro. Las estrellas solo cuentan cuando quien lo publica es dueño del repo.
Superó 1 de 1 revisiones básicas aplicables. No hemos leído el código. Antes de agregar una clave o un token, revisa qué acceso pide el servidor y usa una clave que tenga solo los permisos que necesitas.
El registro no indica ninguna clave obligatoria, aunque algunos servidores te piden iniciar sesión la primera vez que los usas.
Se ejecuta en tu computadora. Tu app de IA lo inicia cuando hace falta, y los datos no pasan por los servidores del creador (a menos que el propio servidor llame a un servicio en línea).
El repo de GitHub cambió por última vez –, y la última versión (1.0.2) llegó al registro hace 3 meses.
Las apps compatibles con MCP, como Claude Desktop, Claude Code, Cursor y VS Code. También necesitas Python (uv) en tu computadora.
En la misma categoría: Spec Driven Development, Remote Desktop Commander, SwarmMemo
Servidores de la misma categoría hechos por otros creadores, ordenados por estrellas.
Cómo leer una tarjeta:★ Estrellas de GitHubiTres pilares: reseñas · revisiones · usoiActualizado = fecha en que se publicó la última versión en el registroi
MCP Server that facilitates spec-driven development workflows, not just Vibe Coding.
Remote Desktop Commander: use files, terminal and processes on your own computers from any AI app.
Talk with agent swarms: rooms, private messages and paid tasks for AI agents
Copiado tal cual del repo del creador. PopNx MCP no lo ha revisado ni lo respalda. Se quitaron HTML, imágenes y scripts. Los enlaces llevan fuera de este sitio.
📄 Read the white paper
Put a policy firewall between an AI agent and every irreversible action.
Your agent wants to run a shell command, send an email, or move money. Guardrail checks that request against rules you wrote, before it happens, and either lets it through, asks a human, or blocks it — with a plain- English reason every time.
git clone <this repo> && cd agent-guardrail
pip install -r requirements.txt
python3 cli.py check --agent trading-agent-001 --tool wallet.transfer \ --args '{"amount": 9999, "to": "0xabc"}'
Or pip install guardrail-mcp gives you a guardrail command directly — same output, no repo checkout required (falls back to the policy bundled in the package if you don't point --policy at your own file):
guardrail check --agent trading-agent-001 --tool wallet.transfer \
--args '{"amount": 9999, "to": "0xabc"}'
{
"decision": "BLOCK", "matched_rules": [ {"rule": "numeric_cap_exceeded", "severity": "BLOCK", "message": "amount=9999.0 exceeds cap 5 for 'wallet.transfer' (unknown agent)"} ] }
That's it — no server, no account, no API key. policies/default.yaml is the file that decided this; open it and change the numbers to match your own rules.
Most "AI agent security" projects (including an earlier project of mine) lean on statistical risk scores computed from data nobody can actually verify at build time — wallet age, "reputation," contract "risk" — which either requires paid data feeds you don't have yet, or quietly becomes mock data pretending to be real. Fine for prototyping, dishonest to ship.
Guardrail only makes claims it can back up. Every check is a deterministic rule — a blocklist entry, a regex match, a numeric cap, a rate limit — evaluated against a policy file you write and can audit yourself, backed by a real, persistent audit log (SQLite) you can query. Nothing here pretends to know something it doesn't.
It's also not blockchain-specific. Shell execution, email, HTTP requests, file deletion, database writes, crypto transactions — same engine, same policy file, same rules.
Shown above. No setup, instant feedback while you write rules.
mcp_server.py) — the easy on-ramp, advisoryExposes guardrail_check, guardrail_record_outcome, and guardrail_agent_history as MCP tools any MCP-compatible agent (Claude Desktop, Claude Code, custom MCP clients) can call.
{
"mcpServers": { "guardrail": { "command": "python3", "args": ["/absolute/path/to/agent-guardrail/mcp_server.py"], "env": { "GUARDRAIL_POLICY": "/absolute/path/to/agent-guardrail/policies/default.yaml" } } } }
Then tell your agent (in its system prompt) to always call guardrail_check before spending money, deleting data, messaging someone externally, or running code.
Be clear-eyed about its limit: like any MCP tool, nothing stops the calling model from just not invoking it. This only helps if the agent is instructed to always check first — for a guarantee it can't skip, see #3.
guardrail.decorator.enforce — the real guaranteeWraps the actual Python function that performs a tool's side effect. The check runs in your code, before that function executes — the model never gets a chance to call the real function directly.
from guardrail.decorator import enforce, BlockedActionError
@enforce(engine, tool_name="send_email") def send_email(agent_id: str, to: str, subject: str, body: str): ... # only runs if the decision is ALLOW, or WARN-and-confirmed
Use this if you're building your own agent loop (LangChain, CrewAI, a custom MCP host, a Slack bot with tool access). Run python3 examples/example_agent_usage.py to see it block a real function call.
guardrail.mcp_enforced_server.EnforcedGuardrailMCPServer — the real guarantee, over MCPThe MCP server in #2 above is honest about being advisory: the model gets a guardrail_check tool, but nothing stops it from calling the *actual* tool (exposed by some other MCP server, or by the model's own direct access) without checking first, or checking one thing and doing another. If the model talks to your infrastructure only over MCP - no Python decorator possible - this is the same #3 guarantee for that case: the operator registers real action executors (the code that holds real credentials and performs the real side effect) as the *only* way the model can invoke that action at all.
from guardrail.mcp_enforced_server import EnforcedGuardrailMCPServer
def do_transfer(request): wallet = get_wallet_for(request.agent_id) # real credentials, held here - never exposed to the model tx_hash = wallet.transfer(to=request.arguments["to"], amount=request.arguments["amount"]) return {"tx_hash": tx_hash}
server = EnforcedGuardrailMCPServer(policy_path="policies/default.yaml") server.register_action( "wallet.transfer", "Transfer funds from the agent's wallet.", input_schema={"type": "object", "properties": {"to": {"type": "string"}, "amount": {"type": "number"}}, "required": ["to", "amount"]}, executor=do_transfer, ) server.serve_stdio()
The model is given exactly one MCP tool named wallet.transfer - there is no separate, unguarded way to move funds through this server. A BLOCK decision means do_transfer never runs. Both this and enforce() share one implementation of "check, maybe route WARN to a human, run only if not blocked, report the real outcome back" (guardrail/enforcement.py) - not two independently-maintained copies of the same guarantee.
on_warn is the hook — Guardrail ships two ready-made implementations:
Local web UI (guardrail/confirmation/web_ui.py) — a tiny built-in server (stdlib only, no Flask) with Approve/Reject buttons. The wrapped function blocks until someone clicks one, or times out (fails closed — timeout means reject, not "allow by default").
from guardrail.confirmation.web_ui import ConfirmationServer
confirmation = ConfirmationServer(port=8787, timeout_seconds=300) confirmation.start(open_browser=True)
@enforce(engine, tool_name="wallet.transfer", on_warn=confirmation.request_confirmation) def transfer(...): ...
Try it live: python3 examples/example_web_confirmation.py, then open http://localhost:8787.
Terminal prompt (guardrail/confirmation/cli_ui.py) — for scripts and local testing where a browser is overkill:
from guardrail.confirmation.cli_ui import cli_confirm
@enforce(engine, tool_name="wallet.transfer", on_warn=cli_confirm) def transfer(...): ...
Neither is required — on_warn is just a function (decision) -> bool, so a Slack message, a ticket, or anything else you already use works too.
Policies are plain YAML — see policies/default.yaml for a real, working starting point (11 confirmation-gated tools, 10 destructive-pattern checks, numeric caps, domain rules, rate limits, all commented).
| Rule type | What it checks |
|---|---|
blocked_tools | Tool names that are never allowed |
confirmation_required_tools | Tool names that always produce WARN |
argument_patterns | Regex against the JSON-serialized call arguments — destructive shell commands, SQL, leaked credentials, path traversal, SSRF, force-pushes, regardless of which tool carries them |
numeric_caps | Per-tool numeric field caps, tighter for agents with no history |
aggregate_caps | A cap shared across *several* tools, tracked as one running total per agent — see below |
domain_rules | Allow/deny lists on a URL or email-recipient field, per tool |
rate_limits | Sliding-window call limits per (agent, tool), backed by SQLite |
numeric_caps limits each tool independently — wallet.transfer capped at 1000/day and wallet.approve capped at 1000/day separately means an agent using both can still move 2000/day combined. aggregate_caps closes that: every tool listed in the same group draws from one shared running total, e.g.
aggregate_caps:
daily_money_movement: tools: wallet.transfer: amount wallet.approve: amount window_seconds: 86400 max_unknown_agent: 5 max_known_agent: 1000
Only *confirmed* spend counts toward the total: a BLOCKed request never adds anything, and a request that's provisionally recorded (because its own check passed) is refunded if the real action later turns out not to have succeeded — engine.record_outcome(request_id, "error"), called automatically by both enforce() and the enforced MCP server (they share one implementation of this, guardrail/enforcement.py) when the real executor raises, or when a WARN a human rejects results in a BlockedActionError. Real enforcement of this therefore has the same caveat as everything else that depends on record_outcome being called: it works fully under enforce() and the enforced MCP server (see below); under the *advisory-only* MCP server (#2 above), a provisionally-recorded amount just stays recorded, since nothing ever reports back whether the action actually happened. See guardrail/storage/aggregate_spend.py's module docstring for the full picture.
No code changes needed to adjust any of this — edit the YAML, restart the process (or the MCP server).
pip install -r requirements.txt
PYTHONPATH=. python3 -m unittest discover -s tests -v
134 tests: rule evaluation, the full engine pipeline (real SQLite-backed rate limiting, aggregate spend tracking, and audit persistence), the enforce decorator and the enforced MCP server (both proving a BLOCK genuinely prevents the real action from running, sharing one implementation of that guarantee), the advisory MCP server's JSON-RPC handling, the confirmation web UI over real HTTP requests against a live server, and a dedicated suite that checks the *shipped* policies/default.yaml — not just synthetic test policies — actually catches what it claims to.
AuditLog redacts values whose key looks sensitive (password, api_key, authorization, ...) and a couple of high-confidence value shapes (PEM private key blocks, JWT-shaped strings) regardless of key name, recursing into nested dicts/lists - see guardrail/storage/redaction.py for exactly what is and isn't caught, and why general-purpose entropy heuristics were deliberately left out (too many false positives on ordinary UUIDs/hashes). Pass AuditLog(redact=False) to store arguments as-submitted, or extra_sensitive_keys={...} to redact additional field names specific to your tools.argument_patterns for whatever your agents actually touch.127.0.0.1 by design (not exposed on the network), but anyone with local access to that port can approve/reject. Fine for a single developer's machine; put it behind your own auth if multiple people share the host.None of these are m
Solo se muestra el principio; lee el resto en el repo