Spec Driven Development
MCP Server that facilitates spec-driven development workflows, not just Vibe Coding.
제작자가 쓴 설명(영어 원문)
Pre-execution gate for AI-agent tool calls. Touch ID approval. Tamper-evident audit log.
이 세 가지는 절대 하나의 점수로 합치지 않아요. 의견, 측정, 인기는 서로 다른 것이니까요.
이 서버는 아직 쉬운 말로 된 요약을 쓰지 못했어요. 아래는 레지스트리에서 읽어 온 사실이에요.
쓰고 있는 AI 앱을 고른 다음 설정을 복사하세요.
필요한 것
어떤 앱을 쓰세요?
위에서 앱을 고르세요. 기억해 두었다가 다음부터는 버튼에 “…에 설치”라고 표시해요.
Claude Desktop → Settings → Developer → Edit Config를 열고 claude_desktop_config.json에 이 내용을 붙여 넣으세요
{
"mcpServers": {
"quill": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"quillx"
]
}
}
}터미널에서 이 명령어를 실행하세요
claude mcp add quill -- uvx quillx프로젝트의 .cursor/mcp.json 또는 ~/.cursor/mcp.json에 붙여 넣으세요
{
"mcpServers": {
"quill": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"quillx"
]
}
}
}브라우저가 앱을 열지 물어본 다음, 앱이 설정을 보여 주고 확인을 요청해요. 키 값은 비워 두니 직접 입력하세요.
프로젝트의 .vscode/mcp.json에 붙여 넣으세요
{
"servers": {
"quill": {
"type": "stdio",
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"quillx"
]
}
}
}브라우저가 앱을 열지 물어본 다음, 앱이 설정을 보여 주고 확인을 요청해요. 키 값은 비워 두니 직접 입력하세요.
이 서버는 내 컴퓨터에서 실행되는데, ChatGPT는 인터넷에 있는 서버에만 연결할 수 있어요. 다른 앱을 고르세요.
선택한 앱은 이 기기의 쿠키에만 저장돼요. 계정은 필요 없어요.
이 설정은 제작자의 레지스트리 정보로 만들었어요. README와 다르면 README를 따르세요.
내 컴퓨터에서 실행돼요. 설치하면 AI 앱에 도구 목록이 나타나요.
누구나 볼 수 있는 정보를 점검했고, 코드는 읽지 않았어요. 해당하지 않는 항목은 개수에서 뺐어요. · 2026년 11월 6일 점검
레지스트리 이름이 GitHub 계정 manumarri-sudo 기준으로 확인되었고, 이 계정이 저장소를 소유하고 있어요
아직 GitHub에서 이 저장소를 읽어 오지 않았어요
아직 GitHub에서 이 저장소를 읽어 오지 않았어요
내 컴퓨터에서 실행되는 서버라 인터넷 엔드포인트가 없어요
내 컴퓨터에서 실행되며, 대신 로컬 설정을 사용해요
내 컴퓨터에서 실행돼요. 도구 목록은 인터넷 엔드포인트가 있는 서버에서만 읽을 수 있어요
레지스트리에서 이 카테고리의 활성 서버 전체와 비교했어요. 스타는 게시자가 저장소를 소유한 경우에만 세요.
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.
레지스트리에 필수 키가 나와 있지 않아요. 다만 처음 쓸 때 로그인을 요구하는 서버도 있어요.
내 컴퓨터에서 실행돼요. AI 앱이 필요할 때 실행하고, 데이터는 제작자의 서버를 거치지 않아요(서버 자체가 온라인 서비스를 호출하는 경우는 제외).
GitHub 저장소는 마지막으로 – 변경됐고, 최신 버전(0.2.0a5)은 5개월 전 레지스트리에 올라왔어요.
Claude Desktop, Claude Code, Cursor, VS Code처럼 MCP를 지원하는 앱에서 쓸 수 있어요. 내 컴퓨터에 Python (uv)도 있어야 해요.
같은 카테고리에는: Spec Driven Development, Remote Desktop Commander, Apify MCP Server
같은 카테고리에서 다른 제작자가 만든 서버예요. 스타 순으로 정렬했어요.
카드 보는 법:★ GitHub 스타i세 기둥: 리뷰 · 점검 · 사용 정도i업데이트 = 최신 버전을 레지스트리에 공개한 날i
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.
Extract data from any website with thousands of scrapers, crawlers, and automations on Apify Store ⚡
제작자의 저장소에서 쓰인 그대로 가져왔어요. PopNx MCP가 검토하거나 보증한 내용이 아니에요. HTML, 이미지, 스크립트는 제거했어요. 링크를 누르면 이 사이트를 벗어나요.
Notari issues a signed Change Passport for every AI-authored pull
request: a receipt any reviewer or auditor can re-verify from the signature
alone, without re-running Notari or trusting a screenshot, recording which
files a human approved the agent to touch and
whether it stayed inside them. A human signs the boundary once; in CI, Notari
checks each pull request against it and stamps the passport PASS,
NEEDS_REVIEW, or BLOCK. There is no model in that verdict, so it cannot
be prompt-injected. It does not judge whether the code is correct: it
attests to *where* the change went and whether it leaked a secret, the part a
human most often skims past on a large agent PR. Alpha; treat
as the source of truth over any one-line claim.
uvx notari init
Nothing to install first. In one command, inside any git repo, that generates an approver keypair and a gate keypair, signs a secure-by-default perimeter, writes the hardened GitHub workflow (pull_request_target, SHA-pinned, the pull request checked out into a data-only directory), gitignores your private keys, and then prints your honest posture plus the exact steps still missing. Measured from a clean machine with no Python tooling configured, the CLI resolves and runs in about a second and a half.
Prefer a persistent install? pipx install notari or pip install notari, then notari init. Either way the next two commands are the whole daily loop:
notari begin "add rate limiting" --scope "src/api/**" # sign what the agent may touch
notari verify --strict # in CI: PASS, NEEDS_REVIEW, or BLOCK
notari initautomatically forbids directories that look sensitive (auth,
migrations,infra,terraform,deploy, and similar). Forbidden beats contract
scope, so scoping a task *into* one of them returns BLOCK by design. When you really
do need to touch one, set the boundary explicitly and sign it:
notari guard --key approver.pem --allow "src/**" --forbid "migrations/**".
Four surfaces, each stated at its real strength rather than its most flattering one:
1. The gate, which is the provable boundary. In CI, outside the agent's reach, every changed path outside .notari/ is measured against a signed scope and a signed perimeter, each touched file is scanned for 26 vendor secret patterns, and renames (both endpoints), mode-only changes, binaries, symlinks, submodules, and .gitattributes diff-hiding are all in the inventory rather than blind spots. You name the scope per task (--scope), so a narrow scope means "only these paths", and the explicit --scope '**' means "anything the signed perimeter does not forbid", stated plainly on the passport either way so a PASS is never ambiguous. Secret detection is a finite pattern set, so it catches the common vendor-format leaks rather than proving no secret exists. There is no model in the decision path, so there is nothing to prompt-inject.
2. The receipt, which outlives the run. A Change Passport (passport.json plus a PR-ready passport.md) whose Ed25519 signature anyone can re-check later with notari verify-passport, months on, on a different machine, so a forged or tampered verdict fails and you trust the signed receipt rather than a screenshot. This checks that the gate genuinely issued this verdict, not that the code is correct, and it does not re-run the gate. Behind it sits an HMAC-chained audit log that detects edits and insertions cryptographically, and trailing truncation against a sealed high-water-mark once notari audit verify has run; the passport's footer cites the exact chain entry for its run.
3. The remediation path, so a BLOCK is actionable. notari explain turns a BLOCK into a per-finding fix and a paste-ready agent prompt, and notari agent-brief hands the next agent its approved scope before it starts. All local, all human-gated, no telemetry, and no raw code, diffs, or secret values ever leave your machine.
4. The guard on your laptop, which is defense-in-depth and not a hard boundary. An optional PreToolUse hook gates the agent's tool calls as they happen (rm -rf, git push --force, DROP TABLE, vercel --prod, .env reads), critical calls need a single-use ten-minute approval that on macOS is hardware-attested through Touch ID on the Secure Enclave, and files the agent writes get an AST pass that flags shutil.rmtree and exec(b64decode(...)) before a later python foo.py can run them.
That fourth row is deliberately labelled: an application-layer gate can be routed around by a determined adversary, and the limits are enumerated in the security model rather than buried. The boundary that holds is the CI one.
New here? Start with the Quickstart (zero to a blocked bad PR in ~10 minutes). Then: Security & threat model · Product & tiers.
Found a bypass, a confusing error, or a reason you'd never adopt this? That is exactly the feedback this alpha exists for: open an issue.
Want to attack it first? bash examples/bypass_probes.sh runs twelve bypass shapes against a freshly signed perimeter and prints the verdict for each: rename into a forbidden path, mode-only change, case variant, a secret hidden behind a .gitattributes -diff entry, an agent widening its own signed contract, and more. Eleven BLOCK; the twelfth is the documented line-split secret limit. A thirteenth shape that earns an undeserved PASS is the single most useful thing you can send.
An AI agent opens a pull request. Which files was it *not* approved to touch? On a 40-file agent diff that is the question a human skims past, and it is the one Notari answers, at the merge boundary in CI, with a signed Change Passport a reviewer can re-verify instead of trusting a screenshot. The verdict is a deterministic function of the diff, the signed contract, and the policy, so there is no model in it to jailbreak. It records *where* the change went and *whether* it leaked a secret; it does not prove the in-scope code is correct or free of a backdoor. That is the honest scope.
An agent edits in and out of scope, and Notari verifies each diff (PASS / NEEDS_REVIEW / BLOCK) against the signed contract (from examples/change_control_demo.sh, unedited):
# 0. one-time: create a human approver key. Keep the PRIVATE half off the build
notari keygen --out approver.pem export NOTARI_APPROVER_PUBKEYS="$(cat approver.pem.pub)"
notari guard --key approver.pem --allow "src/" --forbid "migrations/"
notari begin "Add rate-limiting to the login endpoint" --scope "src/auth/**" --key approver.pem
notari verify --strict # PASS · NEEDS_REVIEW · BLOCK (BLOCK fails the build)
notari verify-passport.
That full sequence, pinned external approver key, signed perimeter, signed contract, --strict, is the real adversarial boundary. Drop any of it (notari begin / notari verify with no flags) and Notari still runs, but in *cooperative* mode: honest review automation for a non-adversarial agent, not a boundary against one trying to escape. Verdict signing is opt-in (it needs a gate key); it is not on by default. See docs/SECURITY-MODEL.md for the full deployment checklist.
notari verify reads git diff ..HEAD, checks every changed file against the scope you approved, scans each touched file for hardcoded secrets and sensitive surfaces (CI config, lockfiles, test deletions), evaluates any logged exceptions, and writes a Change Passport: passport.json + a PR-ready passport.md, that cites the HMAC-chained audit entry for the run, so a reviewer can trace the verdict back to a tamper-evident record instead of trusting the markdown alone.
The agents writing your code have shell access, file write, deploy permissions, and your credentials, and the failures are already on the record: in July 2025 Replit's agent deleted a production database during a vibe-coding session and fabricated data to cover it; that same month a Cursor agent ran rm -rf ~/ against a developer's home directory; in August an autonomous agent committed a customer's GitHub token into a public commit. The common thread is not that the model is evil, it is that nothing checked the change against what was actually approved before it shipped.
Notari puts that check where it can be enforced and recorded: in CI, on the pull request, where the gate runs outside the agent's own process and cannot be quietly switched off by the thing it is reviewing. The verdict is a deterministic function of the diff, the contract, and the policy, there is no LLM in the decision path, so the gate itself cannot be prompt-injected.
Calibration matters more than marketing.
앞부분만 보여 드려요. 나머지는 저장소에서 읽어 보세요