原型 · 预览版:收录官方注册中心里的全部服务器,每 30 分钟同步一次。评价和账户功能将在后续阶段推出。
PopNx MCP为使用 AI 的人准备的 MCP 服务器 · 用大白话讲清楚

Slipmark

作者:founder-ship-it版本 0.6.2i★ –i在你的电脑上运行
注册名称io.github.founder-ship-it/slipmark

安装

概览

作者提供的说明(英文原文)

Record AI agent verdicts bound to file hashes; refuse ones whose files or instructions changed.

PopNx MCP 的三大支柱

这三项永远不会合并成一个分数:意见、测量和人气是不同的东西。

它能帮你做什么

我们还没有为它写通俗的介绍。下面是我们从注册中心读取到的事实。

  • 连接方式: 在你的电脑上运行
  • 传输方式: stdio
  • 分类: 其他

安装

选择你使用的 AI 应用,然后复制设置。

安装之前

  • 基础检查:1 项中通过 1 项
  • 在你的电脑上运行,拥有你的用户账户的权限(文件、网络、应用)。
  • 注册中心没有列出需要填写的密钥。

你需要

  • npm已安装 Node.js(用于 npx 命令)

你用的是哪个应用?

在上方选择你的应用。我们会记住它,下次按钮会显示“安装到 …”。

打开 Claude Desktop → Settings → Developer → Edit Config,把下面的内容粘贴到 claude_desktop_config.json

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "slipmark": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "slipmark",
        "mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

在终端中运行这条命令

claude mcp add slipmark -- npx -y slipmark mcp

在 Cursor 中打开

或者自己复制设置

粘贴到项目中的 .cursor/mcp.json,或 ~/.cursor/mcp.json

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "slipmark": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "slipmark",
        "mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

浏览器会先询问是否打开应用,然后应用会显示设置并请你确认。密钥的值会留空,由你自己填写。

在 VS Code 中打开

或者自己复制设置

粘贴到项目中的 .vscode/mcp.json

{
  "servers": {
    "slipmark": {
      "type": "stdio",
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "slipmark",
        "mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

浏览器会先询问是否打开应用,然后应用会显示设置并请你确认。密钥的值会留空,由你自己填写。

这个服务器在你的电脑上运行,而 ChatGPT 只能连接互联网上的服务器。请选择其他应用。

你的选择通过 Cookie 保存在这台设备上,无需账户。

这些设置是根据作者在注册中心的条目生成的。如果 README 的写法不同,请以 README 为准。

它能做什么

它在你的电脑上运行;安装后,工具列表会显示在你的 AI 应用中。

基础检查i

我们检查的是任何人都能看到的信息;我们没有阅读代码。不适用的检查项不计入总数。 · 检查于 2026年11月7日

  • ✓ 通过

    作者与仓库一致

    注册名称已通过 GitHub 账户 founder-ship-it 验证,该账户拥有此仓库

  • … 尚未检查

    仍在维护

    我们还没有从 GitHub 读取这个仓库

  • … 尚未检查

    有许可证

    我们还没有从 GitHub 读取这个仓库

  • – 不适用

    端点有响应

    它在你的电脑上运行,没有互联网端点

  • – 不适用

    使用 OAuth 登录

    在你的电脑上运行,改用本地设置

  • … 尚未检查

    工具描述中没有隐藏指令

    它在你的电脑上运行;我们只能读取互联网端点的工具列表

与“其他”中的其他服务器比较i

  • 星标数多于此分类中其他 32683 个服务器的 0%
  • 发布到注册中心的时间比此分类中其他 32683 个服务器的 87% 更新
  • 基础检查结果等于或优于此分类中其他 32683 个服务器的 100%

与注册中心里这个分类中所有活跃的服务器比较。只有当发布者拥有该仓库时,星标数才计入。

常见问题

Slipmark 安全吗?

它在 1 项适用的基础检查中通过了 1 项。我们没有阅读代码。在添加密钥或令牌之前,请先看看这个服务器要求哪些权限,并使用只具备所需权限的密钥。

它需要哪些密钥或代码?

注册中心没有列出必需的密钥,不过有些服务器会在首次使用时要求你登录。

它在我的电脑上运行还是在云端?

它在你的电脑上运行。你的 AI 应用会在需要时启动它,数据不会经过作者的服务器(除非它自己调用在线服务)。

它还在维护吗?

GitHub 仓库最后更新于–,最新版本(0.6.2)于5天前进入注册中心。

哪些应用可以使用它?

支持 MCP 的应用,例如 Claude Desktop、Claude Code、Cursor 和 VS Code。你的电脑上还需要有 Node.js。

有什么可以替代它?

同一分类中有:Spec Driven Development, Remote Desktop Commander, MCP Server Autocad Lisp Helper

替代选择

同一分类中其他作者的服务器,按星标数排序。

如何看卡片:★ GitHub 星标i三大支柱:评价 · 检查 · 使用情况i更新 = 最新版本发布到注册中心的时间i

Spec Driven Development

作者:formulahendry

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

在你的电脑上运行★ 440MIT14个月前更新
安装

Remote Desktop Commander

作者:desktop-commander

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

在云端运行★ 211前天更新
安装

MCP Server Autocad Lisp Helper

作者:radwanalmsora

High-precision static analysis and debug server for AutoCAD AutoLISP (.lsp) files.

在你的电脑上运行今天更新
安装

作者的 README

打开 README

按原文从作者的仓库复制。PopNx MCP 没有审查或背书其内容。HTML、图片和脚本已被移除。链接会离开本站。

Slipmark

*A Reply Intelligence Group project.*

Make AI agents prove what they checked.

Add it to a workflow:

- uses: actions/checkout@v4
  • uses: founder-ship-it/Slipmark@v0.6.2 with: require: | specs/your-spec.md

When a file changes after an agent signed it off, the build refuses:

Slipmark verify: 1 verified · 1 refused

✓ verified review-agent verified examples/attestation/brief.md ✗ hash_mismatch security-audit-agent gave "cleared" for a different version of examples/attestation/spec.md. The file changed after the verdict.

Set it up in one command: npx slipmark init. Your coding agents then write their sign-off with slipmark attest (see Works with your coding agent). No model calls, no account, one GitHub Action.

A slip mark is the paint line engineers draw across a bolt once it has been tightened and checked. If the bolt ever moves, the line breaks and everyone can see it. Slipmark does the same for AI agent verdicts: once an agent signs off a file, any change after that breaks the mark.

Agents now review code, audit specs and sign off their own work. The weak point is the verdict. An agent can report "passed" about a file that has since changed, or that it never looked at, and nothing downstream can tell.

Slipmark does two things:

  1. Verdict attestation. Every agent verdict is bound to a SHA-256 hash of the exact files the agent read. Before anything ships, the gate re-hashes them. Mismatch, missing file, failing verdict, or nothing attested at all: it refuses. Deterministic, no model calls, one GitHub Action.
  2. Drift diagnosis. Behavioural "locks" for your AI features. When a change breaks one, Slipmark says what likely broke it, how sure it is (and refuses to fake confidence it doesn't have), and hands your coding agent a repair prompt.

Status: v0.6.2, early. Apache-2.0. Optional hosted layer: Slipmark Cloud.

Why the gate exists

We run a nightly pipeline of 20+ agents: research, architecture, security audit, build, QA. Every morning they reported what passed.

Then we found the final verification job had been checking the wrong branch for months. It could not fail, so it never did. Months of green ticks, proving nothing.

So we built the gate: bind every verdict to the hash of what it read, and re-check before shipping. Pointed at 23 open agent pull requests, it refused all 23.

What Slipmark proves, and what it doesn't

Slipmark doesn't decide whether your agent is right. It makes sure the verdict you are trusting is about the code you are shipping.

It proves:

  • The verdict was given on these exact bytes. Change one and the verdict stops counting.
  • Every file you require has a current, passing verdict. A missing verdict is a refusal, not a silent pass.
  • The answer is the same every time. No model calls, no scoring, no judgement.

It doesn't prove:

  • That the agent was smart. If an agent misses a bug on day one, Slipmark will pass that file for as long as it stays unchanged. That is the agent's verdict, faithfully kept.
  • Who wrote an unsigned attestation. Anyone who can push can write "by": "security-reviewer". Require signed verdicts and only verdicts signed by a workflow you trust count.

So pair it with the checks you already trust. Slipmark is the lock on the verdict, not the verdict. If you want stronger verdicts, require more of them: coverage of every changed file, checks Slipmark runs itself, or a re-review when the model changes. Those are on main now (docs/attestation.md). Two independent reviewers on sensitive paths, and the rest of attestation v2, are next.

Quick start

In the repository you want to protect (Node 22.6 or later):

npx slipmark init
  + create .slipmark/attestations/.gitkeep      attestation directory, committed with the repo
  • create .github/workflows/slipmark.yml report-only gate on pull requests
  • create AGENTS.md agent instructions for attesting verdicts ~ update CLAUDE.md agent instructions for attesting verdicts

That is the whole setup:

  • A workflow that runs the gate on every pull request. It starts in report-only mode, because a repo with no verdicts yet would otherwise fail. Set fail-on-refusal: "true" once your agents are attesting.
  • Agent instructions in AGENTS.md, plus CLAUDE.md, Cursor rules or Copilot instructions if your repo already has them. Re-running init updates the block in place and never touches anything else in those files.

Check any time with npx slipmark verify. Commit .slipmark/attestations/.

Works with your coding agent

The instructions init writes are enough for agents to attest on their own. We gave Claude Code a plain review task in a fresh repo, with no mention of Slipmark:

Review src/export.ts against specs/invoice-export.md. Does it meet the spec?

It read both files, found the export was not CSV, and recorded:

{

"by": "reviewer", "verdict": "fail", "subjects": [ { "path": "src/export.ts", "sha256": "0ea6029f…" }, { "path": "specs/invoice-export.md", "sha256": "81994e0f…" } ], "note": "Tenant filter and 10k limit OK; no CSV output, returns raw query result" }

Both files it based the verdict on, not just the one under review. When the code is fixed, the old verdict stops counting until the agent reads it again.

Setup notes for Claude Code, Cursor, Copilot and Codex are in docs/agents.md.

Claude Code plugin

For Claude Code there is also a plugin. It adds a skill so Claude records verdicts without any repo instructions, /slipmark:verify and /slipmark:setup commands, and a stop check that asks Claude to re-read and re-attest when a file it signed off has changed since.

/plugin marketplace add founder-ship-it/Slipmark

/plugin install slipmark@slipmark

Details, including exactly what it runs, in claude-plugin/.

MCP server: Codex, Cursor, Copilot, Gemini

slipmark mcp serves slipmark_attest and slipmark_verify as MCP tools, so any agent that speaks MCP can record and check verdicts. For OpenAI Codex, in ~/.codex/config.toml:

[mcp_servers.slipmark]

command = "npx" args = ["-y", "slipmark@0.6.2", "mcp"]

Setup for Claude Code, Cursor, Copilot in VS Code and Gemini CLI is in docs/mcp.md. Agents can't record a human approval through it.

Verdict attestation

1. The agent attests what it read. Call this at the end of any agent step that gives a verdict:

slipmark attest --by security-audit-agent --verdict cleared \

--subject specs/invoice-export.md --subject src/export.ts

That writes .slipmark/attestations/ -- .json:

{

"schema": "slipmark/attestation@1", "by": "security-audit-agent", "verdict": "cleared", "at": "2026-10-17T09:00:00.000Z", "subjects": [ { "path": "specs/invoice-export.md", "sha256": "cf89da70…" } ] }

2. The gate checks it before anything ships.

slipmark verify --require specs/invoice-export.md
ResultMeaning
verifiedPassing verdict, and the file is byte-for-byte what the agent saw
hash_mismatchThe file changed after the verdict. The verdict is about a different file.
subject_missingThe attested file no longer exists
verdict_not_passingThe agent said fail or blocked
unattestedA --required file has no current, passing verdict, or there are no attestations at all
invalidMalformed attestation, or a path outside the repo

Passing verdicts are pass and cleared. An empty gate is a refusal, never a silent pass. --json prints the full report for other tools.

Stronger verdicts (on main, unreleased). Record what the verdict was checked against, and let Slipmark run the checks itself:

slipmark attest --by reviewer --verdict pass --subject src/export.ts \

--against specs/invoice-export.md --run "npm test"

A failing --run refuses a passing verdict. Then require a verdict for every changed file, not just the ones you listed:

slipmark verify --coverage diff --base origin/main

Details in docs/attestation.md.

Agent context

Your reviewer passed the code. But who wrote the reviewer's instructions? The coding-agent attacks of 2026 changed AGENTS.md, skills and MCP configs and left the reviewed code alone. Add "context": {} to .slipmark/policy.json and Slipmark binds each verdict to the agent's instructions too:

  • a verdict given under instructions that later changed stops counting
  • a change to AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, a skill or an MCP config needs an approver's verdict (pair it with CODEOWNERS, or require signed approvals)
  • changed instructions must be plain Markdown that GitHub shows in full: an allow-list refuses anything else (HTML, comments, images, diagrams, anything GitHub adds later), and in GitHub Actions each file is checked against GitHub's own renderer
  • context files that link outside the watched set are refused

The policy is read from the base branch, so a pull request can't switch this off. What it doesn't cover yet is listed in the docs. Details in docs/attestation.md.

See it refuse five real attack patterns (Ghostcommit, Deadbugz, hidden comments, invisible Unicode, a PR switching the checks off) as open pull requests in slipmark-context-demo.

Signed verdicts

Prove who gave the verdict, not just what it was about (on main, unreleased). Run the review agent in a GitHub Actions job and sign as it attests:

slipmark attest --by security-reviewer --verdict pass --subject src/auth/session.ts --sign

The verdict is signed with the job's own GitHub identity through Sigstore: no keys to manage, and every signature is in a public transparency log. Then only count verdicts from the workflow you trust:

- uses: founder-ship-it/Slipmark@main

with: require-signed: "true" trusted-signers: | https://github.com/acme/api/.github/workflows/agent-review.yml@refs/heads/main

A verdict typed by hand, made by another workflow, or edited after signing is refused. Details, including which ref to trust, in docs/attestation.md.

As a GitHub Action:

- uses: actions/checkout@v4
  • uses: founder-ship-it/Slipmark@v0.6.2 with: require: | specs/invoice-export.md

Rolling it out gently? Set fail-on-refusal: "false" to report refusals as warnings without failing the build. The step's result output is passed or refused either way.

Formatters. A formatter run changes the bytes, so it breaks a verdict like any other change. Run formatters before your agent attests (first in your pre-commit hooks) and most of this goes away. Formatting-tolerant hash modes and re-reviewing only the diff are planned for v0.5.

Run it on the branch you are about to merge. Because it checks content, not branch names, a verdict produced on one branch can't clear a different tree.

More in docs/attestation.md.

Slipmark Cloud

The gate above is free, open source and needs no account. Slipmark Cloud is the optional hosted layer for teams that need the record, not just the build result:

  • An append-only, hash-chained ledger o

只显示了开头部分;其余内容请在仓库中阅读

问 PopNx