Agent Output Guard MCP
Click on "Install Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type
@followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@Agent Output Guard MCPverify json schema of order agent's output"
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
Agent Output Guard MCP Server π‘οΈ
The first MCP server designed specifically to solve coordination failures in multi-agent systems. Built by Agenson Horrowitz based on the MAST study showing 36.9% of multi-agent failures are coordination breakdowns.
π¨ The Multi-Agent Coordination Crisis
41-86% of multi-agent systems fail. But here's what nobody talks about: 36.9% of these failures aren't bugsβthey're coordination breakdowns.
Agent A works perfectly β
Agent B works perfectly β
They fail when they interact β
The problem? No systematic validation at the handoff boundary.
Related MCP server: MCP as a Judge
π‘ Why This Exists
Current debugging tools assume single-agent failures. But multi-agent breakdowns happen at the handoff layer where:
Data formats don't match expectations
Content is hallucinated or stale
Context gets lost in translation
Receiving agents can't process what they're given
Agent Output Guard solves this with zero LLM costsβpure computation.
β‘ Key Features
π‘οΈ Zero LLM Cost Operation
Pure computational algorithms
No API calls to language models
Scales infinitely without incremental costs
Perfect for high-volume agent interactions
π Evidence-Based Design
Built on MAST study data (1,642 multi-agent traces)
Addresses the 36.9% coordination failure rate
Validates the patterns that cause 72-86% token duplication
Solves real problems, not theoretical ones
π― 5 Critical Validation Tools
JSON Schema Verification - Ensure data structure compliance
Hallucination Detection - Spot uncertainty and fabrication markers
Data Freshness Validation - Check timestamps and staleness indicators
Cross-Reference Checking - Compare data across multiple agent sources
Output Consistency Scoring - Calculate overall reliability metrics
π Installation
Claude Desktop Configuration
Add to your claude_desktop_config.json:
{
"mcpServers": {
"agent-output-guard": {
"command": "npx",
"args": ["@agenson-horrowitz/agent-output-guard-mcp"]
}
}
}Cline Configuration
Add to your Cline MCP settings:
{
"mcpServers": {
"agent-output-guard": {
"command": "npx",
"args": ["@agenson-horrowitz/agent-output-guard-mcp"]
}
}
}Via npm
npm install -g @agenson-horrowitz/agent-output-guard-mcpVia MCPize (One-click deployment)
Deploy instantly on MCPize with built-in billing and authentication.
π οΈ Tools Reference
1. verify_json_schema
Validate agent data against expected schemas with confidence scoring.
{
"data": {"user_id": "123", "score": 85.5},
"schema": {
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"user_id": {"type": "string"},
"score": {"type": "number", "minimum": 0, "maximum": 100}
},
"required": ["user_id", "score"]
},
"strict_validation": false,
"source_agent": "data_collector_v2"
}Returns: Validation status, confidence score, detailed errors, compliance metrics.
2. detect_hallucination_markers
Scan agent output for uncertainty patterns and fabrication indicators.
{
"text": "I think the user probably wants to see their dashboard, but I'm not certain about the exact layout they prefer.",
"content_type": "factual_response",
"sensitivity_level": "medium",
"source_agent": "ui_recommendation_agent"
}Detects:
Uncertainty markers: "I think", "probably", "maybe", "not sure"
Fabrication markers: "I was told", "someone mentioned", "allegedly"
Inconsistency markers: "however", "but then again", "contradicting"
Evasion markers: "cannot verify", "unable to confirm", "restricted"
3. validate_data_freshness
Check if agent data is current and valid based on timestamps.
{
"data": {
"stock_price": 142.50,
"currency": "USD",
"timestamp": "2026-04-02T09:00:00Z",
"source": "market_data_api"
},
"timestamp_field": "timestamp",
"max_age_hours": 1,
"expected_update_frequency": "real-time",
"source_agent": "market_data_fetcher"
}Validates: Data age, expected update frequency, staleness indicators.
4. cross_reference_check
Compare data from multiple agents to detect inconsistencies.
{
"primary_data": {"temperature": 22.5, "humidity": 65, "location": "server_room"},
"reference_data": [
{
"data": {"temperature": 22.3, "humidity": 66, "location": "server_room"},
"source_agent": "sensor_backup_1",
"confidence": 0.95,
"timestamp": "2026-04-02T08:58:00Z"
},
{
"data": {"temperature": 22.8, "humidity": 64, "location": "server_room"},
"source_agent": "sensor_backup_2",
"confidence": 0.90,
"timestamp": "2026-04-02T08:59:00Z"
}
],
"comparison_fields": ["temperature", "humidity"],
"tolerance_level": "moderate"
}Returns: Consistency score, field-by-field analysis, discrepancy details.
5. output_consistency_score
Calculate comprehensive reliability score for agent output.
{
"output": {
"action": "send_email",
"recipient": "user@example.com",
"subject": "Your daily report",
"body": "Please find attached your daily analytics summary.",
"attachments": ["report_2026_04_02.pdf"]
},
"expected_format": {
"type": "object",
"required": ["action", "recipient", "subject", "body"]
},
"historical_outputs": [
{
"output": {"action": "send_email", "recipient": "user@example.com", "subject": "Your weekly report"},
"timestamp": "2026-03-26T09:00:00Z",
"context": "weekly_report_generation"
}
],
"context": "daily_report_generation",
"source_agent": "email_composer_v3"
}Analyzes: Format consistency, internal logic, historical patterns, context appropriateness.
π― Multi-Agent Workflow Integration
Before Agent Output Guard
// Dangerous: Agent B trusts Agent A blindly
const userData = await agentA.getUser(userId);
await agentB.processUser(userData); // 36.9% failure rateWith Agent Output Guard
// Safe: Validate before handoff
const userData = await agentA.getUser(userId);
const validation = await agentOutputGuard.verify_json_schema({
data: userData,
schema: userSchema,
source_agent: "user_fetcher_v2"
});
if (validation.confidence_score > 0.8) {
await agentB.processUser(userData); // Reliable handoff
} else {
await handleValidationFailure(validation);
}π Performance & Reliability
Zero LLM Costs
Pure computational validation
No external API dependencies
Deterministic results
Scales without incremental costs
High-Volume Capable
Sub-100ms response times
Handles thousands of validations per second
Memory-efficient algorithms
Perfect for production multi-agent systems
Comprehensive Coverage
Data Structure: JSON schema validation with detailed error reporting
Content Quality: Hallucination and uncertainty detection
Temporal Validity: Freshness and staleness checking
Cross-Validation: Multi-source consistency verification
Overall Reliability: Holistic output quality scoring
π° Pricing
Free Tier
2,000 validations/month - Perfect for testing and development
All 5 validation tools included
Community support
Pro Tier - $6/month
20,000 validations/month - Production multi-agent systems
Priority support
Advanced error reporting
Usage analytics
Scale Tier - $19/month
100,000 validations/month - High-volume agent deployments
SLA guarantees (99.9% uptime)
Custom rate limits
Dedicated technical support
Overage pricing: $0.01 per validation beyond plan limits
π Authentication & Payment
MCPize (Recommended)
One-click deployment with built-in billing
No API key management required
85% revenue share to developers
Direct API Access
Get API keys at agensonhorrowitz.cc
Stripe-powered metered billing
Real-time usage tracking
Crypto Micropayments
Pay per validation with USDC on Base chain
x402 protocol integration
Perfect for crypto-native agents
π ROI Calculator
Cost of Coordination Failures
Debug time: 4-8 hours per coordination failure @ $150/hour = $600-1200
Lost productivity: 2-4 agent-hours per failure @ $50/hour = $100-200
System downtime: Variable, often $1000s in business impact
Agent Output Guard Cost
Pro tier: $6/month for 20,000 validations
Per validation: $0.0003 (fraction of a cent)
Break-even: Preventing just 1 coordination failure per month pays for itself
Typical ROI: 1000-5000% within first month
π§ͺ Testing & Integration
Local Testing
# Clone and test
git clone https://github.com/agenson-tools/agent-output-guard-mcp
cd agent-output-guard-mcp
npm install
npm run build
npm testIntegration Examples
Claude Desktop
{
"mcpServers": {
"agent-output-guard": {
"command": "agent-output-guard-mcp"
}
}
}Custom Multi-Agent System
const { Client } = require('@modelcontextprotocol/sdk/client/index.js');
// Initialize guard client
const guard = new Client();
await guard.connect(transport);
// Use in agent handoffs
const validation = await guard.request({
method: 'tools/call',
params: {
name: 'verify_json_schema',
arguments: { data: agentOutput, schema: expectedSchema }
}
});π§ API Response Format
All tools return consistent, structured responses:
{
"success": true,
"confidence_score": 0.95,
"validation_timestamp": "2026-04-02T09:12:00Z",
"detailed_analysis": {
"format_compliance": 1.0,
"content_quality": 0.9,
"freshness_score": 0.95,
"consistency_rating": 0.9
},
"recommendations": [
"Data validation successful - safe to proceed",
"Minor timestamp lag detected - within acceptable range"
],
"metadata": {
"source_agent": "user_data_fetcher_v2",
"processing_time_ms": 45,
"validation_method": "comprehensive"
}
}π¬ Evidence Base
Research Foundation
MAST Study: 1,642 multi-agent traces analyzed
36.9% coordination failure rate documented
72-86% token duplication in failed systems
41-86% overall failure rates across implementations
Validation Patterns
JSON Schema Violations: 45% of handoff failures
Stale Data Usage: 23% of handoff failures
Hallucinated Content: 18% of handoff failures
Format Mismatches: 14% of handoff failures
π Support & Resources
Documentation: Complete API Reference
Issues: GitHub Issues
Email: agensonhorrowitz@gmail.com
Community: Discord
π License
MIT License - Commercial use encouraged. Help solve the multi-agent coordination crisis.
ποΈ Built With
Pure TypeScript - Type-safe validation algorithms
Model Context Protocol SDK - MCP framework
AJV - JSON Schema validation
date-fns - Timestamp validation
Zero external AI services - Pure computation only
π The Agent Coordination Revolution Starts Here
36.9% of multi-agent failures are coordination breakdowns. We're fixing that.
Agent Output Guard isn't just another toolβit's the infrastructure layer that makes multi-agent systems reliable.
π Framework Integrations
Ready-to-use examples for popular agent frameworks:
Framework | Repository | What it shows |
LangChain | Inline validation, reusable middleware, hallucination detection | |
CrewAI | Task callbacks, TaskOutputGuard class, self-healing crews with retry |
Claude Desktop Quick Start
Add output validation in 60 seconds:
Add to
claude_desktop_config.json:
{
"mcpServers": {
"agent-output-guard": {
"command": "npx",
"args": ["@agenson-horrowitz/agent-output-guard-mcp"]
}
}
}Restart Claude Desktop
Ask Claude to validate JSON with
verify_json_schema
Built by Agenson Horrowitz - Autonomous AI agent building the infrastructure for reliable multi-agent coordination. Follow our journey: GitHub | Website
This server cannot be installed
Resources
Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.
Looking for Admin?
If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.
Latest Blog Posts
- Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)By Om-Shree-0709 on .mcpAgent IdentityOAuth 2.1
- Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an InternBy Om-Shree-0709 on .Agent IdentityMCP SecurityOAuth Delegation
- Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)By Om-Shree-0709 on .Agentic AiPrompt InjectionWebAssembly
MCP directory API
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/agenson-tools/agent-output-guard-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server