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

AVCS

作者:izagood版本 0.42.0i★ –i在你的电脑上运行
注册名称io.github.izagood/avcs

安装

概览

作者提供的说明(英文原文)

AI-native version control where intent, operation, evidence and decision are first-class objects.

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

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": {
    "avcs": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@izagood/avcs",
        "mcp"
      ],
      "env": {
        "AVCS_REPO": "your-value"
      }
    }
  }
}

在终端中运行这条命令

claude mcp add avcs --env AVCS_REPO=your-value -- npx -y @izagood/avcs mcp

运行前请先填写空着的值。

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": {
    "avcs": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@izagood/avcs",
        "mcp"
      ],
      "env": {
        "AVCS_REPO": "your-value"
      }
    }
  }
}

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": {
    "avcs": {
      "type": "stdio",
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@izagood/avcs",
        "mcp"
      ],
      "env": {
        "AVCS_REPO": "your-value"
      }
    }
  }
}

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。

需要你填写的值

  • AVCS_REPO env
    absolute path of the AVCS repo to serve; defaults to the client cwd

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 izagood 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 32680 个服务器的 0%
  • 发布到注册中心的时间比此分类中其他 32680 个服务器的 31% 更新
  • 基础检查结果等于或优于此分类中其他 32680 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

AVCS 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(0.42.0)于2个月前进入注册中心。

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, EmbeddedCI BenchPod

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

EmbeddedCI BenchPod

作者:embeddedci-com

Drive a BenchPod hardware-in-the-loop bench: power, flash, UART, I2C, CAN, analog and logic.

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。

AVCS — Agentic Version Control System

*An AI-native version control system for humans and AI agents working concurrently.*

An agent should not spend its context on version control. That is the whole design goal, and it is measured rather than asserted — here is what the same work costs an agent:

What an agent pays forgit / the full surfaceAVCS
Landing a change after someone else's PR merged first (30 KB module)18,922 tokens279 tokens — *99% less*
Round trips to finish that recovery74
Tool schema, paid on every session≈8.8k tokens (39 tools)≈3.5k tokens (13, --profile core)
What a same-line collision hands the modelthe whole file, with conflict markersone object naming the two contending operations

git's recovery cost tracks the size of the file — a conflict is bytes inside it, so the agent reads the whole module and writes the whole module back to change one line. AVCS's tracks the size of the change: a conflict is an object naming the two contending operations, so it stays flat as the file grows. There is also no branch to rewrite and nothing to force-push, which is why the round trips differ — and that is *one* cycle, repeated for every PR that merges ahead of yours. Across the file sizes measured the saving is 37–99%.

None of this is a compression trick bolted on afterwards. It falls out of storing the operation graph instead of snapshots: there is no rebase to perform, so there is nothing to re-read. Method, caveats and the harness that produced the rebase numbers: avcs-demo → what it costs an agent in tokens. The schema figures are the advertised MCP surface itself — 35 KB of JSON against 14 KB, at the usual ≈4 bytes per token.

Git records when the code changed.

AVCS records who changed it, with what intent, on what evidence, and through which conflict decisions the code reached its current state.

AVCS is a new, deliberately Git-incompatible version control system built for a world where humans and many AI agents edit the same codebase concurrently. It drops the commit / branch / merge / conflict-marker model and instead stores intent, session, operation, evidence, and decision as first-class objects. The code tree is not the source of truth — it is a projection computed by deterministically *reducing* the operation graph:

state = reduce(base, operationDAG, decisions, policy, materializer)

The same objects + the same policy + the same materializer produce the same tree on any replica. Merging is not text selection; it is a pure, deterministic reduction.

Status: research prototype. The implementation is real and test-covered, but every phase is built to a *working-MVP depth* (language-neutral text 3-way merge, ed25519 signing). Structure-aware merge, semantic-break detection, multi-signature trust, and hardened distributed sync are tracked on the roadmap.

Jump in: install · your first five minutes · work against a server · connect an agent over MCP · agent quickstart walkthrough

See it run first: izagood/avcs-demo — a runnable demo of the question this design answers: *what happens when two agents edit the same file at the same time?* One ./demo.sh walks a stale-head land that is absorbed instead of rejected, a same-file auto-merge with no rebase, and a same-line collision that becomes a signed decision rather than conflict markers.

Why not a layer on top of git?

Every "AI + git" tool eventually stores the agent's context *beside* the history — commit trailers, PR comments, sidecar JSON. AVCS exists because these objects have to be load-bearing — consumed by the merge machinery itself — and bolted onto git they can't be:

  • Evidence must gate merging. git happily merges a behavior change with no passing test. In AVCS that change is graded L3 — blocked by the reducer until *trusted* evidence lands, and an operation's own author vouching for it does not count.
  • Decisions must outlive the merge. git merge resolves a conflict by emitting bytes; the choice and its rationale evaporate. An AVCS decision is a signed object — recallable later, and prior decisions bias future auto-resolution.
  • Concurrent edits must not degrade into conflict markers. Two agents editing one file meet a deterministic policy reduction (L0–L4 below), not <<<<<<< in the tree plus a human holding the pieces.
  • Intent must travel with the work. A trailer is inert text. An intent (goal + constraints + allowed scope) is what sessions open against, what leases and contention checks are scoped by, and what avcs.context.build hands the next agent.

git stores snapshots and leaves the merge to text selection; AVCS stores the operation graph and makes the merge a computation over intent, evidence, and decisions. That is why it is deliberately git-incompatible — these objects are the engine, not metadata. (git interop still exists, as a bridge: docs/14, docs/20.)

Core principles

#PrincipleContrast with Git
1Operations are history, not commitsA commit is merely a checkpoint over many operations
2Identity is the entity ID, not the file pathRename + edit can auto-merge
3Merge is a deterministic reduction, not text selectionNo conflict markers
4A conflict is a first-class `decision` object, not a broken fileThe rationale stays in history
5AI output is a proposed operation with attached evidence, not trusted codeA behavior change with no test cannot be accepted
6Code never defaults to last-write-winsPrecedence is decided by policy

How it works

Every meaningful thing is a content-addressed, append-only object. Code is a *projection* over the operation DAG, never stored as commits.

ObjectRole
intentWhy a change is being made (goal + constraints + allowed scope)
sessionAn agent/human work episode against an intent
operationA single semantic change unit — the real history
evidenceMachine-checkable proof (test / typecheck / lint / scan) attached to operations
decisionA recorded resolution of a conflict or design choice
checkpointA verified (ops + policy + materializer) state vector — replaces a commit
viewA declarative query over the operation graph — replaces a branch
releaseA signed, provenance-bearing checkpoint — replaces a tag
policyThe deterministic merge rules the reducer is parameterized by

…plus blob for raw content and the governance objects (lease, membership, protection, promotion, redaction, override, approval, line, integration) used by the multi-machine and security phases.

Conflict resolution levels

AVCS never falls back to last-write-wins for code. Contending operations are graded and resolved with a recorded rationale:

  • L0 / L1 — different entities, or disjoint line regions in the same file → auto-merge
  • L2 — concurrent edits that overlap the same line region → policy auto-decision (human-preferred, trust-weighted); the auto-decision is itself recorded in autoDecisions
  • L3 — a behavior change with no *trusted* evidence → blocked
  • L4 — a public-API break → requires a human decision, routed to the scope's owners

Evidence trust matters: an operation's own author cannot vouch for it. Evidence-gating and the passing-test bonus only count evidence produced by a *non-authoring, trusted* actor (CI bot / human).

What works today

The reducer and policy engine are the foundation; the higher phases build distributed collaboration, security, and observability on top.

Foundation (Phases 1–6)

  • Storage core — append-only, content-addressed object store (.avcs/objects)
  • Deterministic reducer + policy engine — the L0–L4 conflict grading above, with a priority ladder, bounded reliability nudges, and auditable auto-decisions
  • Language-neutral text merge (Phase 2) — a deterministic N-way line-level 3-way merge (src/merge/merge3.ts), so edits to disjoint regions of one file auto-merge regardless of language; overlapping edits become a policy-resolved conflict region. No language parsing in the core
  • Cryptographic trust (Phase 3) — ed25519-signed evidence/decision; forged signatures fail the trust gate. Real validation runner, WorkLease, RepairContext
  • Decision memory (Phase 4) — recallable prior human decisions (recallDecisions) and distilled "learned policies" that bias future auto-resolution
  • Policy depth (Phase 5) — code-owner routing and bounded reliability learning
  • Release & provenance (Phase 6) — verified checkpoints + CycloneDX SBOM + signed artifacts

Collaboration, scale & security (Phases 7–12)

  • Phase 7 — multi-machine: membership/roles (signed key federation), pull (object gossip; two replicas converge to the same treeHash), protection + finalize CAS (non-fast-forward rejected, so a stale push can't overwrite fresh history)
  • Phase 8 — lineage: long-lived divergent lines (e.g. v1.x ∥ v2.x, same path, different content, zero conflict), portOp (backport = cherry-pick)
  • Phase 9 — scale: entity index, materializeAt (time travel), chunked large-blob storage with dedup
  • Phase 10 — observability: blame (who/why), logP, deterministic bisect, diff
  • Phase 11 — external contributions: quarantine tier + promote + untrusted-CI gate
  • Phase 12 — security: redact (byte-eviction of leaked secrets, oid preserved), break-glass override, forward-only rollback
  • Local undo (docs/23) — avcs undo [--last | …] [--purge] [--no-git]: drop local ops from the view, and with --purge evict the bytes they uniquely reference. Refuses once the ops have been pushed, because that case belongs to admin-gated redact. In a git-bridged repo --purge clears the git copy too — but only where it can prove the rewrite is safe and local (nothing on a remote, the commits at the tip, no other work in them, a clean tree); anywhere else it still does the AVCS side and names precisely what is left and the one command that fits, up to and including "rotate the credential, it is already published"
  • The working tree is genuinely derived — checkout records what it projected (.avcs/projection.json, path → blob oid) and, on the next projection, removes the files the target view no longer contains. Files it never wrote — build output, ignored files, anything you just created — are untouched, and a projected file you have since edited is kept and named in a notice rather than silently overwritten. Switching views therefore yields *that view*, not the union of every view pro

只显示了开头部分;其余内容请在仓库中阅读

问 PopNx