Hacktoberfest 2026: los issues que los mantenedores marcaron para octubre, abiertos y aptos para principiantes. Explorar issues de Hacktoberfest

EABC/cMCP profile: map order_create to execution_id, authorized-intent, observed-effect and execution scope

Abierto
  • ¿Algo no está bien?
#290 1 comentario 0 reacciones 0 asignados Ver en GitHub

Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día

Nadie ha tomado este issue todavía.

Evaluación

Dificultad
5/5
Tiempo estimado
Más de una semana
Aptitud para principiantes
35/100
Tipo de issue
Documentación
Claridad
Bastante claro
Estado de actividad
Activo
Stack tecnológico
python
Área
documentation

Línea de trabajo

Start by reviewing Discussion #50 and the existing cMCP/TRACE integration material to identify the profile’s intended location and current field conventions. The issue names no files or tests, and asks maintainers to settle the profile location, correlation and authority fields, and how Execution Scope should be represented. Done means those questions are resolved and the agreed profile contract is ready to document.

Escrito por el modelo de indexación a partir del texto del issue.

Descripción

Summary

Following Discussion #50, this issue proposes an EABC interoperability profile for cMCP using fields/mechanisms already present in cMCP/TRACE where possible, and isolates the remaining Execution Scope question.

The intent is not to claim native EABC conformance for cMCP. The profile asks what can be mapped directly, what is adapter-level, and what remains unmapped.

Existing mappings

EABC concern cMCP / TRACE mechanism Status
Effect correlation cMCP execution_id + TRACE references[] with rel: observed-effect MAPPED
Authority binding Cedar decision + TRACE references[] with rel: authorized-intent for an externally held grant MAPPED
Exact execution binding cMCP execution/action binding at the forwarding seam MAPPED at the tested adapter seam
Execution Scope declaration of all paths capable of producing the protected effect OPEN / NEW

Concrete example: order_create

The EABC example uses an authorized intent whose parameters include an item/product and quantity, with the resulting protected operation represented as an order_create effect.

The intended evidence chain is:

authorized intent
      ↓
Cedar decision
      ↓
execution_id
      ↓
execution scope
      ↓
order_create
      ↓
observed effect

The corresponding EABC question is:

For the declared order_create effect domain, are all paths capable of producing that effect inside the mediated execution boundary?

This is the Execution Scope / Complete Mediation part. Merely observing MCP forwarding does not establish that arbitrary alternative paths to the same downstream effect are impossible.

Current EABC evidence boundary

Our existing EABC/cMCP work classifies cMCP mediation as scope-bounded rather than universal. It demonstrates an adapter-level execution seam and exact request binding, but does not claim universal downstream effect mediation or physical-world effect proof.

Therefore the profile should preserve:

  • scoped mediation claims;
  • explicit NOT_CLAIMED / gap status where evidence is absent;
  • separation of authorization, execution correlation, and downstream effect observation.

Requested maintainer feedback

  1. Is this the right location and shape for an EABC/cMCP interoperability profile?
  2. Is execution_id the intended cMCP correlation anchor for the profile?
  3. Is rel: authorized-intent the appropriate authority-binding relation when the grant is held outside cMCP?
  4. What is the canonical cMCP representation for Execution Scope: the set/topology of effect-producing paths, or another existing field/object?
  5. If cMCP does not currently represent that scope, should the gap be tracked as a separate cMCP issue rather than extended in the integration profile?

No PR is attached yet. The goal of this issue is to agree the profile location and field contract before adding repository content.

Lenguaje dominante
Python
Estrellas
5
Forks
27
Merge medio
1 d 13 h
PR fusionados (30 d)
104

Preparar el entorno

Primeros pasos

  1. Lee el issue completo y luego la guía de contribución del proyecto.
  2. Comenta en el issue que vas a ocuparte — evita que dos personas hagan lo mismo.
  3. Haz un fork del repositorio y trabaja en una rama.
  4. Abre un pull request que haga referencia al número del issue.

Más de agentrust-io/integrations

Todos los issues de agentrust-io/integrations

Issues similares

Más issues de Python

Recibe los nuevos issues en tu correo

Un resumen breve de issues de GitHub para principiantes.