Context7
Up-to-date docs for AI agents
作者による説明(英語の原文)
Exact polynomial checks, sparse expansion and verified rule memory. Local MCP tools, no model key.
この3つを1つのスコアにまとめることはしません。意見、測定、人気はそれぞれ別のものだからです。
このサーバーのやさしい解説はまだ書いていません。以下はレジストリから読み取った事実です。
使っているAIアプリを選んで、設定をコピーしてください。
どのアプリを使っていますか?
上でアプリを選んでください。選んだアプリを覚えておくので、次からはボタンに「…にインストール」と表示されます。
リンク先は作者自身のファイルです。私たちが置いたり再パッケージしたりしたものではありません。ファイルを開くと、Claude Desktopがインストールします。
ターミナルでこれを実行します
ブラウザがアプリを開いてよいか確認し、そのあとアプリが設定を表示して確認を求めます。キーの値は空欄のままなので、自分で入力してください。
ブラウザがアプリを開いてよいか確認し、そのあとアプリが設定を表示して確認を求めます。キーの値は空欄のままなので、自分で入力してください。
これはパソコンで動くサーバーですが、ChatGPTがつなげるのはインターネット上のサーバーだけです。ほかのアプリを選んでください。
選んだアプリは、この端末のCookieに保存されます。アカウントは不要です。
この設定は、作者のレジストリ登録情報から作成しています。READMEと違う場合は、READMEに従ってください。
パソコンで動くサーバーです。インストールすると、ツール一覧がAIアプリに表示されます。
誰でも見られる情報をチェックしており、コードは読んでいません。当てはまらない項目は数に入れていません。 · 2026年11月8日にチェック
レジストリ名は、リポジトリを所有するGitHubアカウント 1105216375-alt で確認済みです
コードの最終更新:23 日前
MITを使用
これはパソコンで動くため、インターネット上のエンドポイントはありません
パソコンで動き、代わりにローカルの設定を使います
パソコンで動くサーバーです。ツール一覧を読み取れるのは、インターネット上のエンドポイントがある場合だけです
レジストリでこのカテゴリにある有効なすべてのサーバーと比較しています。スターは、公開者がリポジトリの所有者である場合だけ数えます。
当てはまる基本チェック3項目のうち3項目に合格しました。コードは読んでいません。キーやトークンを追加する前に、サーバーがどんなアクセスを求めているかを確認し、必要な権限だけを持つキーを使ってください。
レジストリには必須のキーは載っていません。ただし、最初に使うときにサインインを求めるサーバーもあります。
あなたのパソコンで動きます。必要なときにAIアプリが起動し、データは作者のサーバーを通りません(サーバー自体がオンラインサービスを呼び出す場合を除きます)。
GitHubリポジトリの最終更新は23 日前、最新バージョン(0.16.0)がレジストリに届いたのは24 日前です。
Claude Desktop、Claude Code、Cursor、VS CodeなどのMCP対応アプリで使えます。パソコンにMCPBも必要です。
同じカテゴリには:Context7, Codebase Memory, Exa
同じカテゴリで、ほかの作者が作ったサーバー。スターの多い順。
カードの見方:★ GitHubスターi3つの柱:レビュー · チェック · 利用状況i更新=最新バージョンをレジストリに公開した日i
Up-to-date docs for AI agents
Codebase knowledge graph for AI agents — 162 languages, sub-ms queries, 99% fewer tokens.
Connect AI agents to Exa for web search, content fetching, and multi-step research.
作者のリポジトリから書かれたとおりにコピーしたものです。PopNx MCPは内容を確認・推奨していません。HTML、画像、スクリプトは取り除いています。リンクはこのサイトの外へ移動します。
Catch the error. Keep the insight. Give the next task a checked head start.
Run the demo · Connect MCP · Install the Skill · Take the challenge · 中文
Frontier roadmap and evidence · External theorem benchmark boundary
Latest on `main` (after v0.16.0): memory provenance, expiry and transfer auditing, reserved revision steps in the ChinaTravel integration, and an experimental external Lean template compiler. The latest same-model planning result and development rerun are published with their failures; neither establishes a planning success-rate gain. MiniF2F and LeanDojo scores are still pending.
ResiMind is an open-source neuro-symbolic Agent architecture that connects independent verification, residual-guided self-correction and reusable rule memory. Your model, rules or symbolic tools propose a step; domain checks decide what becomes a fact. Failed checks tell the next attempt what still needs fixing.
A checked solution can become a checked rule. Explicit learning extracts candidate rules from completed derivations, independently verifies admission, and rechecks each future application. Knowledge grows outside the model, without changing its weights. When local rules or tools suffice, the supported math routes run with zero model calls.
Formal memory can now compose checked conditions. The bounded Lean planner introduces an implication, applies a verified conditional lemma, and sends the resulting residual subgoal to another verified lemma or a local assumption. The whole typed plan is compiled again by Lean; structural matching never counts as proof. This is an experimental composition primitive, not a claim of MiniF2F or general theorem-proving leadership.
The core also runs bridge engineering, constrained optimization, customer support and open-ended planning with their own verifiers. Adaptive algebra, rule learning and the five MCP tools currently cover bounded rational polynomials. Core: Python 3.10+, no runtime dependencies. Optional MCP: Python 3.11+.
| What you want to do | Your entry point |
|---|---|
| Give an existing Agent exact algebra tools | MCP setup · Download MCPB |
| Teach an Agent a bounded verify-and-repair workflow | Repair Skill · Install guide |
| Build an Agent with your own checks | Architecture · Adapter contract |
| Inspect what has actually been measured | Evidence · Release validation |
Created and originally published by @1105216375-alt. Citation · Changelog
Evaluating tools for your Agent? Make this one catch a wrong answer first. Run the nine-call integration probe: reject → repair → learn → recall, including an unsupported-scope control. No model key. Machine-readable cases · Documentation index
With Python installed:
git clone https://github.com/1105216375-alt/resimind.git
cd resimind python -m venv .venv source .venv/bin/activate python -m pip install . python -m resimind demo --domain lifelong
On Windows PowerShell, activate with .venv\Scripts\Activate.ps1. Installation may download build tools. The demo runs offline, without an API key; both python -m resimind and the installed resimind command work outside the checkout.
The first demo solves two training problems, extracts a checked rule, saves and reloads frozen memory, and transfers that rule to new coefficients. It then solves a long expansion using a sparse certificate. The frozen memory stays unchanged throughout evaluation. No API calls are made.
All demo commands: math, bridges, planning, support and Lean
Choose a different challenge. These commands run offline; the Lean example additionally requires an installed Lean 4.29.0 toolchain:
| Try | What the example makes visible | Command |
|---|---|---|
| Learning across episodes | Save and reload frozen memory, transfer a checked rule, and verify a long sparse expansion | python -m resimind demo --domain lifelong |
| Search and learning | Fit strategy preferences, extract checked schemas, and recheck only affected bridge cases | python -m resimind demo --domain search-learning |
| Goal progress | Skip a cosmetic rewrite, act on remaining expansion goals, and allow a useful step with a larger expression | python -m resimind demo --domain progress |
| Local scheduling | Reuse a useful rule, simplify before an expensive substitution, and skip model callbacks when local work suffices | python -m resimind demo --domain scheduling |
| Expression growth | Compare primitive expansion with bounded distribution and term collection on four quadratic factors | python -m resimind demo --domain growth-control |
| Lean proof feedback | A real unfinished Lean goal drives a new tactic, then a checked rule is reused | python -m resimind demo --domain lean |
| Adaptive reasoning | Reject a wrong step, change strategy, finish a proof and reuse its checked rule | python -m resimind demo --domain adaptive |
| Knowledge growth | Derive a rule, verify and store it, then reuse and recheck it on a new task | python -m resimind demo --domain knowledge-growth |
| General architecture extensions | Track dependent residual work, rank frozen strategies, and exact-check a reusable rule schema | python -m examples.general_architecture |
| Open-ended planning | Many valid answers; time, budget, and route constraints still apply | python -m resimind demo --domain planning |
| Customer support | A ¥259 refund proposal fails the configured ¥249 calculation | python -m resimind demo --domain customer-support |
| Mathematics | A lower objective is useless if the candidate violates a constraint; check an exact optimality certificate | python -m resimind demo |
| Bridge engineering | Balanced forces can still hide incompatible rotations at a shared pier | python -m resimind demo --domain bridge |
Add --json to inspect the audit. Connect DeepSeek when you want the model to compose its own plan.
| Capability | What actually executes |
|---|---|
| Residual-guided recovery | A failed check can trigger a smaller local task, a verified rule, a symbolic rewrite, or a checked checkpoint return. Work budgets stay bounded. |
| Verified memory | Independently admit candidate rules, persist and freeze the Python library, recheck on reload, and verify each new application. MCP memory is process-local. |
| Compact exact computation | Shared expressions and sparse rational certificates handle long expansions within explicit resource limits. |
| Optional proof feedback | Lean 4.29.0 checks generated Rat equalities; unfinished goals can guide the next proposal. Lean is separate from the MCP tools. |
| Residual proof composition | A bounded typed plan introduces conditions, applies verified conditional lemmas, solves residual subgoals, and is compiled as one Lean proof. |
The adaptive demo deliberately proposes a wrong expansion, rejects it, changes approach, completes a proof, and reuses its checked rule on a new-variable task. Its proposals are scripted; the verification, state transitions, admission and reuse really execute.
Run these in one process after installing the core (Bash/Zsh; see the JSON-lines guide for the request format):
python -m resimind api <<'JSONL'
{"tool":"verify_identity","arguments":{"lhs":"(x+1)2","rhs":"x2+1","variables":["x"]}} {"tool":"learn_polynomial","arguments":{"expression":"(a+b)3","variables":["a","b"]}} {"tool":"learn_polynomial","arguments":{"expression":"(u+v)3","variables":["u","v"]}} {"tool":"recall_polynomial","arguments":{"expression":"(2*x+3*y)**3","variables":["x","y"]}} JSONL
What to look for: the false identity is rejected; the first learning example adds no rule; the second compatible example produces an independently checked cubic schema. Recall uses it on new coefficients in one rule action, zero model calls, followed by exact verification. This is a reproducible example, not a general performance claim. Response fields, bounds and persistent Python memory →
Give it 28 public polynomial tasks: 12 correct chains, 12 mutated chains and 4 unsupported controls. Ask it to locate the first wrong step, repair it, and respect the supported scope. An independent SymPy scorer checks the submissions.
Try the challenge → · Install the verify-and-repair Skill → · Searchable task examples →
| Domain | The failure worth catching | See it run |
|---|---|---|
| Mathematics | A lower objective at an infeasible point | Exact optimality certificates |
| Bridge engineering | Forces balance, but pier rotations do not agree | Two spans, eight load cases |
| Open-ended planning | A plausible itinerary breaks a hard constraint | Multiple answers, checked feasibility |
| Customer support | A refund