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

InterAI Risk Oracle

제작자: InterAILabs버전 0.1.3-beta.1i★ –i클라우드에서 실행
레지스트리 이름io.github.InterAILabs/ai-risk-oracle

설치

개요

제작자가 쓴 설명(영어 원문)

Pre-execution policy gate for consequential agent actions with durable trust receipts.

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://api.interailabs.dev/mcp

터미널에서 이 명령어를 실행하세요

claude mcp add --transport http ai-risk-oracle https://api.interailabs.dev/mcp

Cursor에서 열기

또는 설정을 직접 복사하기

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

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "ai-risk-oracle": {
      "url": "https://api.interailabs.dev/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": {
    "ai-risk-oracle": {
      "type": "http",
      "url": "https://api.interailabs.dev/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://api.interailabs.dev/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 InterAILabs 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 32661개 중 0%보다 스타가 많아요
  • 이 카테고리의 다른 서버 32661개 중 43%보다 최근에 레지스트리에 공개됐어요
  • 기본 점검 결과가 이 카테고리의 다른 서버 32661개 중 100%와 같거나 더 좋아요

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

자주 묻는 질문

InterAI Risk Oracle, 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(0.1.3-beta.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, Claude Checkpoint MCP

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

Claude Checkpoint MCP

제작자: daniel-munoz

MCP server that checkpoints Claude Code session context to survive crashes and token limits

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.

InterAI Risk Oracle

Independent pre-execution decision layer for consequential agent actions.

Before an agent executes, InterAI verifies.

I’m Alejandro Bolognese, building InterAI through InterAI Labs as ongoing work on agent infrastructure, execution control, trust boundaries, and production systems.

Live proof: Action Boundary Lab · Controlled safe demo · Architecture & authority boundary · OpenAPI

InterAI sits between an autonomous agent and a consequential action. The agent proposes what it wants to do; InterAI evaluates the action in context, applies authoritative host/account constraints plus any request-scoped caller constraints, and returns a machine-readable authority decision:

proposed action

| v InterAI | +--> ALLOW +--> REVIEW_REQUIRED +--> BLOCK | v signed trust receipt

The important boundary is not merely can this principal technically perform the action? It is:

Should this specific action execute now, in this context, under this policy?

That makes InterAI complementary to authentication, permissions, spend limits, workflow rules, and domain-specific controls rather than a replacement for them.

Where InterAI Fits

Identity / authentication

"Who is this?" | Permissions / deterministic limits "Can this principal do this class of operation?" | InterAI "Should this exact proposed action execute in this context?" | Execution / escalation / abort

Use InterAI when an agent is about to do something with real consequences: execute a tool, move funds, update production state, approve a workflow, sign a wallet action, send an external message, or trigger another irreversible or costly operation.

Decision Contract

For autonomous execution requests, the primary InterAI authority contract is:

  • recommended_action: allow, review_required, or block
  • policy_result: the authority result under the effective policy
  • policy_violations: explicit policy findings when applicable
  • trust_receipt_id: durable decision evidence
  • execution_intent_digest: deterministic identifier for the exact intent evaluated
  • effective host/account/caller policy provenance in authenticated decision receipts

review_required means the current agent should not execute autonomously under the current policy. Review can be handled by a supervisor agent, policy system, governance queue, wallet rule, or human operator.

Exact-action binding

For executable pilot authorization, the host constructs the trusted action envelope interai-canonical-action/v1 and the host-attested execution context interai-host-execution-context/v1. InterAI returns a CanonicalExecutionIntent (interai-canonical-execution-intent/v2), execution_intent_digest, and—only for an authenticated allow—an ExecutionAuthorization (interai-execution-authorization/v1). The host must verify the receipt, rebuild the final invocation immediately before the side effect, recompute the canonical digest, validate the authorization, and fail closed on any mismatch. A change to tool, arguments, authoritative actor, run, workspace, environment, resource/destination, or relevant policy invalidates the earlier allow and requires a new decision. review_required and block are non-authorizing.

Execution authorization is single-use and short lived: 1–300 seconds, 60 seconds by default. InterAI does not provide universal distributed replay prevention across external runtimes; the host must atomically and durably consume the authorization when that guarantee is required.

If review changes the action, it is a new proposed intent. In Pydantic AI: proposal → review/override → final validation → InterAI → exact-intent check → execute; apply ToolApproved.override_args before final validation and InterAI.

The current hosted beta also returns score, risk_level, and machine-readable signals. Those fields remain part of the current compatibility surface and are useful for diagnostics and existing integrations, but they should not be interpreted as the fundamental authority contract. The execution boundary is the final allow / review_required / block decision under effective policy.

Policy authority boundary

Hosted authenticated autonomous execution composes policy in strict authority order:

HOST -> ACCOUNT -> CALLER -> EFFECTIVE
  • Host policy is an InterAI-controlled irreducible floor.
  • Account policy is a versioned profile stored outside the action request and attached only after the bearer credential resolves to its account.
  • Caller policy can add request-scoped restrictions but cannot weaken host or account requirements.
  • Effective policy is the stricter composition used for the decision.

Account policy administration is currently an InterAI-administered control plane. This is not yet customer self-service policy management, delegated tenant administration, or an enterprise policy-management product.

Accountless/x402 execution has no account profile to resolve and therefore remains HOST -> CALLER -> EFFECTIVE.

External Evidence

InterAI can accept verifiable assertions produced by external systems without transferring execution authority to those systems.

External evidence. Internal authority.

The provider asserts. InterAI decides authority.

The boundary is deliberate:

external provider

| | signed / verifiable assertion v InterAI parse -> verify -> bind -> record

Current Stage 2 evidence is verified, bound, and recorded as non-authoritative external evidence. It does not change the InterAI execution decision or current compatibility risk signals.

The provider’s verdict remains an assertion, not an InterAI execution instruction. An upstream PASS, CAUTION, or BLOCK does not directly become ALLOW, REVIEW_REQUIRED, or BLOCK inside InterAI.

This separation matters because evidence and authority are different responsibilities. A specialized system may know something valuable about the world without becoming the system that decides whether an autonomous action is authorized to execute.

The current external-evidence boundary is intentionally narrow and non-authoritative. Live reference resolution or any future authority-bearing mode would be a separate trust-boundary decision, not an implicit extension of the current contract.

See docs/external-evidence.md and docs/architecture.md.

Insight ↔ InterAI

Verified interoperability

Insight and InterAI independently implemented and cross-verified interoperability against the frozen external-evidence/v0 rev6 contract. The result demonstrates that a domain-specific provider can produce signed evidence that InterAI independently verifies, binds, and records as non-authoritative external evidence, while preserving the separation between provider assertion and InterAI execution authority.

This is an independently implemented technical interoperability result. It does not imply a production partnership or live production dependency between Insight and InterAI.

Example

{

"use_case": "agent-before-payment", "action": { "type": "payment", "name": "release_vendor_payment", "description": "Release payment to a vendor agent after delivery validation", "amount_usd": 125, "currency": "USD", "irreversible": false, "external_side_effect": true }, "context": { "agent_id": "agent_123", "environment": "production", "counterparty_id": "vendor_agent_456", "user_confirmation": false }, "policy": { "require_trust_receipt": true, "amount_usd_limit": 500 } }

Possible authority result:

{

"request_contract": "autonomous_execution", "recommended_action": "allow", "policy_result": "allow", "execution_intent_digest": "sha256-hex-digest", "trust_receipt_id": "tr_01JZPUBLICEXAMPLE" }

The hosted beta currently includes additional compatibility fields such as score and risk_level; they are omitted above to keep the execution-authority boundary clear.

The calling system then decides how to honor that authority decision:

ALLOW             -> verify receipt + exact intent + authorization, then execute

REVIEW_REQUIRED -> route / pause / escalate BLOCK -> abort

InterAI does not execute the action. The surrounding execution layer must route on the decision and enforce the final exact-intent comparison.

Try The Hosted Beta

Action Boundary Lab — change the proposed action and inspect the real pre-execution decision boundary:

https://api.interailabs.dev/lab

Controlled safe demo — one limited read-only sandbox verification with a real trust receipt:

https://api.interailabs.dev/demo

Hosted verification:

curl -sS -X POST https://api.interailabs.dev/verify \

-H "Authorization: Bearer " \ -H "Content-Type: application/json" \ -H "X-Idempotency-Key: vendor-payment-001" \ -d '{ "use_case":"agent-before-payment", "action":{"type":"payment","name":"release_vendor_payment","amount_usd":125,"currency":"USD","irreversible":false,"external_side_effect":true}, "context":{"environment":"production","counterparty_id":"vendor_agent_456","user_confirmation":false}, "policy":{"require_trust_receipt":true,"amount_usd_limit":500} }'

Trust Receipts

Every consequential decision can produce a durable trust receipt. Receipts are designed to make pre-execution decisions inspectable and transportable across retries, handoffs, governance systems, and later audits.

Authenticated autonomous DecisionReceipts bind policy provenance and execution_intent_digest. An ExecutionReceipt is separate host/runtime evidence about dispatch or outcome. A DecisionReceipt is evidence of a decision, not a bearer token or proof that a side effect occurred.

Current receipt signatures use HMAC-SHA256 and are service-verifiable by InterAI. That provides authenticated service-side integrity; it is not the same guarantee as an independently verifiable public-key signature that a third party can validate offline without InterAI.

A receipt proves what the signed receipt payload authenticates at that point in time. It does not prove that an underlying claim is universally true and does not replace domain-specific controls or human review where those are required.

See docs/trust-receipts.md.

Open Source Tools

The public repo contains small framework-neutral tools under toolkit/. They are licensed separately under Apache-2.0 and remain intentionally separate from the proprietary Risk Oracle decision engine:

  • Agent Action Gate — fail closed on provider uncertainty and execute only an unambiguous allow.
  • Exact Action Binding — deterministic host-side mutation detection for JSON-compatible proposed actions.
  • Decision Receipts — consume owner-authenticated signed evidence, assert an exact execution-intent digest, and use InterAI's service-verification endpoint without reserializing the opaque signed payload.

Run the standalone public contracts with no package install:

node --test toolkit/*/*.test.mjs

These tools expose integration/enforcement logic only. Production verification, scoring, native decision policy, billing/storage, signing internals, trust intelligence and operational systems remain private. See the public tool boundary.

InterAI uses a hub-and-satellites model: this repository remains the Risk Oracle product/contracts/SDK hub, while selecte

앞부분만 보여 드려요. 나머지는 저장소에서 읽어 보세요

PopNx에게 묻기