modelcontextprotocol/experimental-ext-tool-annotations
Watch
1
0
Fork
You've already forked experimental-ext-tool-annotations
 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

Sync intent-comment record with the live SEP-1913 comment

Browse source 
The posted SEP-1913 umbrella comment was updated to match the shipped
structure: two extensions plus a schemes/ folder, with FIDES as one
data-labelling scheme (ifc.fides.v1) rather than an extension/profile.
Bring docs/intent-comment.md back in sync as the source of record and
add the three stacked PR links (#2 base, #3 action-metadata, #4 FIDES
scheme).

Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
This commit is contained in:
Sam Morrow 2026-06-16 01:30:47 +02:00
commit 67f84f72e8
No known key found for this signature in database
1 changed files with 21 additions and 9 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

30
docs/intent-comment.md
View file

@ -35,25 +35,37 @@ in sync with [sep-disposition.md](./sep-disposition.md).
> an Extensions Track SEP. Incubation is in
> [`experimental-ext-tool-annotations`](https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/experimental-ext-tool-annotations).
> >
> Kicking off with a few draft extensions in the tool annotations repo — not
> sure yet whether they'd each need separate repos eventually, or whether
> grouping them in one is fine. That's part of what incubation is for.
> It's now scaffolded as \*\*two extensions plus a `schemes/` folder\*\* of
> interchangeable data-labelling approaches, shipped as a stacked set of PRs:
> >
> - [#2](https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/experimental-ext-tool-annotations/pull/2) — repo scaffolding + the `trust-annotations` extension (the base).
> - [#3](https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/experimental-ext-tool-annotations/pull/3) — the `action-metadata` extension.
> - [#4](https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/experimental-ext-tool-annotations/pull/4) — FIDES as a data-labelling \*\*scheme\*\* under `schemes/`.
> >
> | Extension | Scope |
> |---|---|
> | `trust-annotations` | The narrow data-classification taxonomy (`sensitive`, `untrusted`) + an open-ended `evidenceRef` pointer for richer, out-of-band evidence. |
> | `action-metadata` | Tool I/O + outcome contract (folds in @rreichel3's SEP-2061). |
> | `ifc-fides` | Information-flow control ([arXiv:2505.23643](https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.23643)) as **one profile** of `evidenceRef`, not a wire root — the public/private-repo confidentiality case, with github-mcp-server as an emitter example. |
> >
> \*\*Data-labelling schemes (the `evidenceRef` slot).\*\* Richer evidence models
> are \*not\* extensions and \*not\* a wire root. They live in `schemes/` as
> interchangeable fillers of the `trust-annotations` `evidenceRef` slot, each
> selected by an `evidenceRef.type` value, so a deployment can adopt one, several,
> or none without changing the extension. FIDES information-flow control
> ([arXiv:2505.23643](https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.23643)) is the first worked scheme
> (`ifc.fides.v1`) — the public/private-repo confidentiality case, with
> github-mcp-server as an emitter example. The folder is built to hold the range of
> other models raised in review (coarse data classification, design-pattern
> controls, capability tokens, cosigning, sequence-shape, attestation).
> >
> Deliberately removed: `maliciousActivityHint` (the structural concerns raised
> here are unresolved) and session-level propagation rules.
> >
> This follows the same Standards-Track → Extensions-Track refactor pattern as
> SEP-2127 (#2893). This PR will eventually pivot to the `trust-annotations`
> piece itself, with the other schema-bearing pieces moving out into their own
> extensions. Everything is still in the incubation phase, so naming, design,
> and the choice of what to put forward as an extension are all open for
> discussion in the IG.
> SEP-2127 (#2893). This PR is now the `trust-annotations` base of the stack; the
> `action-metadata` extension and the `schemes/` folder are stacked on it.
> Everything is still in the incubation phase, so naming, design, and the choice of
> what to put forward as an extension are all open for discussion in the IG.
---