프로토타입 · 미리 보기: 공식 레지스트리의 모든 서버를 담고 있으며 30분마다 동기화해요. 리뷰와 계정 기능은 다음 단계에서 열려요.
PopNx MCPAI를 쓰는 사람을 위한 MCP 서버 · 쉬운 말로 설명해요

Agent Failure Archive

제작자: HanbeenMoon버전 0.3.1i★ –i클라우드에서 실행
레지스트리 이름io.github.HanbeenMoon/agent-failure-archive

설치

개요

제작자가 쓴 설명(영어 원문)

186 real AI agent post-mortems, 107 of them measurement failures. Free tools, paid via x402.

PopNx MCP의 세 기둥

이 세 가지는 절대 하나의 점수로 합치지 않아요. 의견, 측정, 인기는 서로 다른 것이니까요.

할 수 있는 일

이 서버는 아직 쉬운 말로 된 요약을 쓰지 못했어요. 아래는 레지스트리에서 읽어 온 사실이에요.

  • 연결 방식: 클라우드에서 실행
  • 전송 방식: Streamable HTTP
  • 카테고리: 기타

설치

쓰고 있는 AI 앱을 고른 다음 설정을 복사하세요.

설치하기 전에

  • 기본 점검: 1개 중 1개 통과
  • 제작자의 서버에서 실행돼요. 내가 요청한 내용은 제작자의 서버를 거쳐요.
  • 레지스트리에 입력해야 할 키가 나와 있지 않아요.

필요한 것

어떤 앱을 쓰세요?

위에서 앱을 고르세요. 기억해 두었다가 다음부터는 버튼에 “…에 설치”라고 표시해요.

웹, 데스크톱, 모바일의 Claude에서 쓸 수 있어요:

  1. Settings → Connectors 열기
  2. Add custom connector 누르기
  3. 아래 주소를 붙여 넣고 Add 누르기
  4. 로그인하라고 하면 제작자의 서비스에 로그인하기
SettingsConnectors1+ Add2https://…3
https://desktop-ai2ata5-1.tailfeb765.ts.net/mcp

터미널에서 이 명령어를 실행하세요

claude mcp add --transport http agent-failure-archive https://desktop-ai2ata5-1.tailfeb765.ts.net/mcp

Cursor에서 열기

또는 설정을 직접 복사하기

프로젝트의 .cursor/mcp.json 또는 ~/.cursor/mcp.json에 붙여 넣으세요

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "agent-failure-archive": {
      "url": "https://desktop-ai2ata5-1.tailfeb765.ts.net/mcp"
    }
  }
}

브라우저가 앱을 열지 물어본 다음, 앱이 설정을 보여 주고 확인을 요청해요. 키 값은 비워 두니 직접 입력하세요.

VS Code에서 열기

또는 설정을 직접 복사하기

프로젝트의 .vscode/mcp.json에 붙여 넣으세요

{
  "servers": {
    "agent-failure-archive": {
      "type": "http",
      "url": "https://desktop-ai2ata5-1.tailfeb765.ts.net/mcp"
    }
  }
}

브라우저가 앱을 열지 물어본 다음, 앱이 설정을 보여 주고 확인을 요청해요. 키 값은 비워 두니 직접 입력하세요.

ChatGPT는 인터넷에 있는 서버에만 연결할 수 있어요:

  1. 웹에서 ChatGPT 열기 → Settings → Connectors (Apps)
  2. Create 또는 Add 누르기(일부 요금제는 먼저 Advanced에서 Developer mode를 켜야 해요)
  3. 아래 주소를 붙여 넣고 이름을 정한 뒤 저장하기
  4. 로그인하라고 하면 제작자의 서비스에 로그인하기
SettingsConnectors1+ Create2https://…3
https://desktop-ai2ata5-1.tailfeb765.ts.net/mcp

메뉴 이름은 요금제나 시기에 따라 조금 다를 수 있어요.

선택한 앱은 이 기기의 쿠키에만 저장돼요. 계정은 필요 없어요.

이 설정은 제작자의 레지스트리 정보로 만들었어요. README와 다르면 README를 따르세요.

할 수 있는 일

아직 이 서버의 도구 목록을 읽지 않았어요. 엔드포인트는 차례대로 돌아가며 점검해요.

기본 점검i

누구나 볼 수 있는 정보를 점검했고, 코드는 읽지 않았어요. 해당하지 않는 항목은 개수에서 뺐어요. · 2026년 11월 7일 점검

  • ✓ 통과

    제작자와 저장소 일치

    레지스트리 이름이 GitHub 계정 HanbeenMoon 기준으로 확인되었고, 이 계정이 저장소를 소유하고 있어요

  • … 아직 점검 안 함

    계속 관리되고 있음

    아직 GitHub에서 이 저장소를 읽어 오지 않았어요

  • … 아직 점검 안 함

    라이선스 있음

    아직 GitHub에서 이 저장소를 읽어 오지 않았어요

  • … 아직 점검 안 함

    엔드포인트 응답

    아직 점검하지 않았어요. 엔드포인트는 차례대로 돌아가며 점검해요

  • … 아직 점검 안 함

    OAuth로 로그인

    아직 점검하지 않았어요. 엔드포인트는 차례대로 돌아가며 점검해요

  • … 아직 점검 안 함

    도구 설명에 숨겨진 지시 없음

    아직 점검하지 않았어요. 엔드포인트를 점검할 때 도구 목록을 읽어요

기타 카테고리의 다른 서버와 비교i

  • 이 카테고리의 다른 서버 32655개 중 0%보다 스타가 많아요
  • 이 카테고리의 다른 서버 32655개 중 30%보다 최근에 레지스트리에 공개됐어요
  • 기본 점검 결과가 이 카테고리의 다른 서버 32655개 중 100%와 같거나 더 좋아요

레지스트리에서 이 카테고리의 활성 서버 전체와 비교했어요. 스타는 게시자가 저장소를 소유한 경우에만 세요.

자주 묻는 질문

Agent Failure Archive, 안전한가요?

해당하는 기본 점검 1개 중 1개를 통과했어요. 코드는 읽지 않았어요. 키나 토큰을 넣기 전에 서버가 어떤 권한을 요구하는지 확인하고, 꼭 필요한 권한만 있는 키를 쓰세요.

어떤 키나 코드가 필요한가요?

레지스트리에 필수 키가 나와 있지 않아요. 다만 처음 쓸 때 로그인을 요구하는 서버도 있어요.

내 컴퓨터에서 실행되나요, 클라우드에서 실행되나요?

제작자의 클라우드에서 실행돼요. 설치 없이 인터넷으로 연결하지만, 보내는 내용은 제작자의 서버를 거쳐요.

아직 관리되고 있나요?

GitHub 저장소는 마지막으로 – 변경됐고, 최신 버전(0.3.1)은 2개월 전 레지스트리에 올라왔어요.

어떤 앱에서 쓸 수 있나요?

Claude Desktop, Claude Code, Cursor, VS Code처럼 MCP를 지원하는 앱에서 쓸 수 있어요. URL로 연결되기 때문에, 원격 MCP 서버를 지원하는 앱(예: 개발자 모드의 ChatGPT)에서도 쓸 수 있어요.

대신 쓸 수 있는 건 뭐가 있나요?

같은 카테고리에는: Spec Driven Development, Remote Desktop Commander, SuperCollider

대안

같은 카테고리에서 다른 제작자가 만든 서버예요. 스타 순으로 정렬했어요.

카드 보는 법:★ GitHub 스타i세 기둥: 리뷰 · 점검 · 사용 정도i업데이트 = 최신 버전을 레지스트리에 공개한 날i

Spec Driven Development

제작자: formulahendry

MCP Server that facilitates spec-driven development workflows, not just Vibe Coding.

내 컴퓨터에서 실행★ 440MIT14개월 전 업데이트
설치

Remote Desktop Commander

제작자: desktop-commander

Remote Desktop Commander: use files, terminal and processes on your own computers from any AI app.

클라우드에서 실행★ 211그저께 업데이트
설치

SuperCollider

제작자: Tok

Make sound with SuperCollider: synths, drums, chords, melodies and soundscapes over OSC.

내 컴퓨터에서 실행오늘 업데이트
설치

제작자의 README

README 열기

제작자의 저장소에서 쓰인 그대로 가져왔어요. PopNx MCP가 검토하거나 보증한 내용이 아니에요. HTML, 이미지, 스크립트는 제거했어요. 링크를 누르면 이 사이트를 벗어나요.

Agent Failure Archive

186 post-mortems from running a multi-session AI agent system in production for 8 months. Pay per call with x402. No signup, no API key, no subscription.

Live: https://desktop-ai2ata5-1.tailfeb765.ts.net Try it free, right now: /sample

Public repositories show you code that worked. This is the other half: the wiring that looked correct, passed review, ran for weeks, and was dead the whole time.


Why this exists

The expensive failures in agent systems are not the loud ones. A crash gets fixed in an hour. The costly ones are silent: a repair routine wired to a signal nobody consumes, a watcher that exits 0 after its session expired, a detector whose output is identical whether the system is healthy or broken.

Those failures are almost never written down, because writing them down requires having run the thing long enough to be bitten and having kept records. This archive is that record.

A real entry (case adr-136):

A broadcast call failed with an internal error. The caller saw the error. The five receiving

sessions only ever checked for an acknowledgement, so they saw nothing and retried forever.

Seven sessions writing heartbeats plus the retry storm collapsed the database into lock

contention.

Root cause: the failure was visible to the sender and invisible to the receiver. Asymmetric

error visibility, not the broadcast bug itself.

Of the 186 cases, 174 carry measured evidence (durations, counts, rates) and 155 name a root cause rather than just a symptom.


The measurement half

For eight months this system was pointed at one question: can you measure how a single person's language departs from the general language, without collapsing that person into a score?

It mostly failed, and the failures were more interesting than the goal. 107 of the 186 cases are measurement failures: detectors that returned the same output whether the signal was present or absent, dose-response arms where the same parameter turned out to be two different treatments, positive controls that were never run, a corpus that was 2.3x smaller than the file count claimed, an instrument that kept measuring itself and reporting the reading as a finding.

Those are the cases behind /research. If you are building anything that claims to measure a person -- style, personality, authorship, fit to a profile -- this is the catalogue of ways that claim breaks before you notice it has broken.


Endpoints

RoutePriceWhat you get
GET /freeservice metadata
GET /samplefreetwo full cases, no payment
GET /contentsfreeevery case title, tagged by the trap it illustrates. Filter with ?theme=
GET /audit?claim= &evidence= $0.02nine checks against fooling yourself, applied to your own claim
GET /search?q= $0.013 cases: symptom, root cause, fix, prevention, evidence
GET /brief?action= $0.05pre-flight risk brief + checklist across 5 cases
GET /research?q= $0.25the 107 measurement failures above
GET /archive$1.00every case, one response, one payment, yours

Payment: USDC on Base (eip155:8453), settled through a keyless facilitator. Any x402 client works, and a browser gets a wallet-connect paywall instead of raw JSON.

# free, no wallet needed

curl https://desktop-ai2ata5-1.tailfeb765.ts.net/sample

paid, via any x402-capable client

curl https://desktop-ai2ata5-1.tailfeb765.ts.net/search?q=silent+failure+cron

/audit is the one to reach for before you write *"we found that"*. Hand it your conclusion and what you actually measured, and it returns the checks your claim trips: a null result with no positive control, treatment arms that got the same parameter but not the same treatment, a denominator counting the same unit repeatedly, an exit-0 process that did nothing, a cached view read as if it were state. Nine checks, every one of them a failure that really shipped here, with the numbers measured at the time.

It is deterministic. No model is consulted, so the same input always returns the same audit, it answers in milliseconds, and when it is wrong you can see exactly why. A clean pass is not proof your claim is true; it means these nine known ways of fooling yourself were considered.

Paste a paragraph, not a tidy claim. Both /precheck and /audit accept text= instead of claim=. Give them a chunk of your findings and they pick out the sentences that assert something, then check each one separately:

curl -sG https://desktop-ai2ata5-1.tailfeb765.ts.net/precheck \

--data-urlencode "text=We ran the new ranker on 40 sampled queries and found no significant difference. The watcher is healthy: it exits 0 every run. Our corpus contains 4279 documents, 2x the previous release."

returns three claims, each held for a different reason: the null result has no positive control, the healthy watcher would look identical having done nothing, and the corpus count may be counting re-dumped snapshots. Sentence selection is deterministic too, driven by the same check table rather than by a model, so prose with no claims in it comes back empty instead of inventing findings.

/brief is the one to reach for before doing something irreversible: describe the action in plain words and it returns the ways that class of action has actually gone wrong, plus the prevention line each incident produced.

/contents is the shelf. Two sample cases cannot tell you whether the whole corpus is worth a dollar, so this returns all 186 titles, each tagged with which of the nine traps it illustrates, and nothing else. The distribution as of today: 108 cases involve reading a cached view as state, 83 involve a denominator counting the same unit twice, 71 involve something built with no caller, 36 involve a process that exited 0 having done nothing. Titles only, no bodies, no payment.

/archive exists because a corpus is worth more whole than sliced. One payment ends the transaction; there is nothing to cancel afterwards.


Use it as an MCP server

mcp_server.py exposes the whole archive as tools for Claude Desktop, Cursor, or any MCP-compatible agent. The free tools need no wallet and no configuration.

pip install "mcp[cli]" requests            # free tools only

pip install "x402[mcp]" eth-account # add this for the paid tools

{

"mcpServers": { "agent-failure-archive": { "command": "python3", "args": ["/absolute/path/to/mcp_server.py"], "env": { "X402_PRIVATE_KEY": "0x..." } } } }

ToolWallet neededWhat it does
prechecknowhich of the nine checks your conclusion trips
samplenotwo complete post-mortems
service_infonocontents and prices
audityesthe full audit, $0.02
searchyesthree matching incidents, $0.01
briefyespre-flight risk brief, $0.05
researchyesthe 107 measurement failures, $0.25
archiveyeseverything, $1.00

X402_PRIVATE_KEY is your wallet. It stays on your machine and is used locally to sign payment authorizations. It is never transmitted anywhere, and this server never logs it. Drop the env block entirely if you only want the free tools.

Without a key the paid tools do not fail silently: they return the reason, the payment challenge, and a pointer to the free equivalent.

Tested against mcp 2.1.0 and the 1.x FastMCP layout: eight tools listed, precheck answered with no wallet, audit degraded with a stated reason.


What is not in here

  • No personal data. Any source document mentioning a person, a business relationship, or a monetary amount is excluded whole, not redacted line by line.
  • No operator utterances. The corpus keeps the structure of each incident, never the voice.
  • Wallet addresses, home paths, IP addresses, emails, API keys and session identifiers are masked before a document is ever considered for inclusion.

The filter is tested against a deliberately planted probe string on every build; if the detector fails to catch it, the build aborts. Current state: 0 leaks across 186 cases, positive control passing.


Measured notes on the market

While trying to sell a dollar of this, we measured how x402 discovery and revenue actually behave, and several widely held assumptions turned out to be wrong. Written up with the exact unauthenticated calls so you can check rather than trust: MARKET.md.

Short version: the modal price is a tenth of a cent to three cents but a seller doing $0.85 per call at 125,000 calls a month exists; eight of the top ten buyers pay exactly one seller, so the headline volume is vertical integration rather than a marketplace; the directory chat everyone assumes will find your service has not been used since May; and getting into the facilitator directory needs one observed payment attempt, not a completed sale.


Honest limits

  • This is one operator's system. It is prior art, not a guarantee, and not a statistical sample of agent systems in general.
  • Coverage is skewed toward what that system does a lot of: multi-session coordination, hook and cron wiring, retrieval pipelines, inter-process messaging, scheduled repair, and the measurement work described above.
  • Some entries record a failure whose fix was later found to be wrong. Those are kept, with the correction, because the correction is usually the more useful half.
  • Nothing here has sold yet. At the time of writing the receiving address has taken in exactly $0.00. That number is checked on-chain rather than from server logs, and this line gets updated when it changes.

Running it yourself

pip install -r requirements.txt

X402_PAY_TO=0xYourAddress uvicorn server:app --port 8402

Without X402_PAY_TO the paid routes return 503 with the reason stated in the body, rather than failing quietly. That behaviour is not incidental. It is case adr-546 applied to this service's own code.

PopNx에게 묻기