CSL-Core
Related Servers
Alternatives to CSL-Core
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceProof-of-behavior enforcement for AI agents. Declare behavioral constraints, enforce at runtime, produce SHA-256 hash-chained audit trails. Supports covenants (permit/forbid/require), real-time verification, and cross-agent trust handshakes.440MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceDeterministic policy enforcement for AI agent tool calls. It evaluates every tool call against user-defined rules before execution, with no LLM in the authorization path.3MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceA runtime gate for coding agents. Blocks the tool calls that wreck a repo (force-push main, rm -rf, secret exfiltration, CI wipe) and lets normal build and commit work through. Machine-checked git-branch core (z3); the rest is high-precision heuristics. Tested on 3,790 real CI commands, 0 false blocks.1MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityNot gradedmaintenanceEnables formal verification of LLM outputs against compliance ontologies using Z3 SMT solver. Validates that AI-generated content adheres to regulatory requirements like HIPAA or mortgage compliance rules.MIT
- AlicenseBqualityAmaintenanceEnables deterministic verification for AI assistants by executing Python code that uses symbolic engines like SymPy and Z3 for math, logic, and code analysis.2Apache 2.0

agentguardofficial
AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnforces policy controls for AI agents, including spend limits, action approvals, kill switch, scoped credentials, dry-run diffs, loop prevention, and auditable hash-chained logs.MIT
TDQS
Scored across 6 tools
Each tool targets a distinct activity on CSL policies: generating a scaffold, explaining in Markdown, simulating against inputs, verifying with Z3, verifying with TLA+, and analyzing the state space. The descriptions clearly differentiate them, especially verify_policy vs tla_verify by specifying different verification scopes (logical consistency vs temporal safety).
Most tools follow a verb_noun pattern (explain_policy, scaffold_policy, simulate_policy, verify_policy), but tla_verify and universe_info deviate: tla_verify uses a proper noun prefix, and universe_info is noun_noun. This minor inconsistency prevents a perfect score.
With 6 tools, the server is well-scoped for a CSL policy toolkit. It covers creation, explanation, simulation, logical verification, temporal verification, and state-space analysis without being over- or under-populated.
The tool surface covers the essential policy lifecycle: generate (scaffold), understand (explain, universe_info), test (simulate), verify (verify_policy, tla_verify). No obvious missing functionality like editing or compilation, as verification already includes IR compilation.