Spec Driven Development
MCP Server that facilitates spec-driven development workflows, not just Vibe Coding.
作者提供的说明(英文原文)
186 real AI agent post-mortems, 107 of them measurement failures. Free tools, paid via x402.
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。
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。
选择你使用的 AI 应用,然后复制设置。
你需要
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 …”。
适用于网页版、桌面版和手机版 Claude:
https://desktop-ai2ata5-1.tailfeb765.ts.net/mcp在终端中运行这条命令
claude mcp add --transport http agent-failure-archive https://desktop-ai2ata5-1.tailfeb765.ts.net/mcp粘贴到项目中的 .cursor/mcp.json,或 ~/.cursor/mcp.json
{
"mcpServers": {
"agent-failure-archive": {
"url": "https://desktop-ai2ata5-1.tailfeb765.ts.net/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。
粘贴到项目中的 .vscode/mcp.json
{
"servers": {
"agent-failure-archive": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://desktop-ai2ata5-1.tailfeb765.ts.net/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。
ChatGPT 只能连接互联网上的服务器:
https://desktop-ai2ata5-1.tailfeb765.ts.net/mcp菜单名称可能因套餐和版本不同而略有差异。
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。
我们还没有读取这个服务器的工具列表;我们会轮流检查各个端点。
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
注册名称已通过 GitHub 账户 HanbeenMoon 验证,该账户拥有此仓库
我们还没有从 GitHub 读取这个仓库
我们还没有从 GitHub 读取这个仓库
尚未检查;我们会轮流检查各个端点
尚未检查;我们会轮流检查各个端点
尚未检查;我们会在检查端点时读取工具列表
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。
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。
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。
它在作者的云端运行。通过互联网连接,无需安装,但你发送的内容会经过作者的服务器。
GitHub 仓库最后更新于–,最新版本(0.3.1)于2个月前进入注册中心。
支持 MCP 的应用,例如 Claude Desktop、Claude Code、Cursor 和 VS Code。它通过 URL 连接,所以接受远程 MCP 服务器的应用也可以使用,例如开启开发者模式的 ChatGPT。
同一分类中有:Spec Driven Development, Remote Desktop Commander, SwarmMemo
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
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.
Talk with agent swarms: rooms, private messages and paid tasks for AI agents
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。
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.
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.
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.
| Route | Price | What you get |
|---|---|---|
GET / | free | service metadata |
GET /sample | free | two full cases, no payment |
GET /contents | free | every case title, tagged by the trap it illustrates. Filter with ?theme= |
GET /audit?claim= &evidence= | $0.02 | nine checks against fooling yourself, applied to your own claim |
GET /search?q= | $0.01 | 3 cases: symptom, root cause, fix, prevention, evidence |
GET /brief?action= | $0.05 | pre-flight risk brief + checklist across 5 cases |
GET /research?q= | $0.25 | the 107 measurement failures above |
GET /archive | $1.00 | every 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
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.
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..." } } } }
| Tool | Wallet needed | What it does |
|---|---|---|
precheck | no | which of the nine checks your conclusion trips |
sample | no | two complete post-mortems |
service_info | no | contents and prices |
audit | yes | the full audit, $0.02 |
search | yes | three matching incidents, $0.01 |
brief | yes | pre-flight risk brief, $0.05 |
research | yes | the 107 measurement failures, $0.25 |
archive | yes | everything, $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.
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.
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.
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.