cc-crossbeam-tw

Crossbeam TW is a source-bound document workflow for Taiwan interior-renovation submissions: route the case, check the packet, decompose corrections, and preserve the evidence needed for human review.

This repository is a prototype for architects, interior-renovation contractors, and administrative coordinators who spend more time reconciling procedures, drawings, correction notices, and missing documents than making the professional decisions themselves.

tw-law-mcp turns that work into deterministic, traceable MCP tools. A compatible assistant can inspect the local corpus and source snapshots, return the relevant artifacts and uncertainty, and stop for human confirmation when the evidence is incomplete. It is deliberately not a legal-advice or professional-sign-off system.

繁體中文說明 · Public Pages · Architecture · Acceptance evidence · Contributing

Contents

• Why

• How it works

• What it does

• Trust and security

• Install

• Example prompts

• Current status

• Repository map

• Research and design

• FAQ

• Related projects

Related MCP server: mcp-tw-lvr

Why

The difficult part of an interior-renovation submission is rarely a single lookup. The difficult part is keeping these questions connected without losing their provenance:

• Which procedure is this case actually approaching?

• Which documents, drawings, photos, and evidence belong in the submission packet?

• What does each correction item ask someone to change or confirm?

• Which source, date, gate, and professional decision support the next action?

Crossbeam TW is built around that handoff. It keeps domain logic in a standalone MCP server, makes uncertainty visible, and treats human review as a required output rather than an exception.

The current domain focus is New Taipei interior renovation. Other jurisdictions are represented by registry stubs and fail closed until their source corpus and review policy are ready.

How it works

The repository has two related surfaces:

1. Standalone MCP server — the host-neutral tw-law-mcp domain boundary used by Codex, Claude Code, or another MCP client.

2. Secure Web pilot — a local or single-user browser workflow for case intake, quarantine upload, masking, HITL review, artifacts, audit events, and deletion.

flowchart LR
    A[Masked text + file metadata] --> B[tw-law-mcp]
    B --> C[Procedure route]
    B --> D[Submission packet]
    B --> E[Correction items]
    B --> F[Sources + gates]
    C --> G[Human confirmation]
    D --> G
    E --> G
    F --> G

    R[Raw browser bytes] --> Q[Private quarantine]
    Q --> W[Python scan + masking worker]
    W --> A
    G --> S[Sanitized artifacts]

The Secure Web path keeps raw bytes out of the Next.js request body, model prompt, and logs. The local Codex provider is a worker credential only; it is never the website identity provider.

TODO (demo asset): the GitHub Pages site is static documentation, not a hosted instance of the Secure Web pilot — the actual HITL flow requires local Google/LINE auth and a locally running worker, which cannot be captured as a real screenshot or GIF from this environment. A walkthrough recording of the Secure Web HITL flow (intake → quarantine → masking → human confirmation) is still needed; track it as a follow-up once the pilot runs somewhere reachable for capture.

What it does

The server currently exposes 38 MCP tools across law lookup, source policy, procedure routing, document handling, HITL, scenario checks, and acceptance gates. The canonical tool surface is in tw_law_mcp/server.py; the complete scenario index is in docs/tw-scenario-feature-matrix.md.

Trust and security

Read the Secure Web runbook before handling real documents.

This prototype does not:

• decide whether a case is legal, illegal, or an unauthorized construction;

• provide legal opinions, compliance guarantees, or professional certification;

• guarantee that an authority will approve a submission;

• decide fire-design conclusions or verify material authenticity;

• enable PDF/image parsing in the authenticated worker; only UTF-8 TXT intake is supported in the pilot.

Install

MCP server

Requirements: Python >=3.10.

git clone https://github.com/trionnemesis/cc-crossbeam-tw.git
cd cc-crossbeam-tw

python3 -m unittest discover -s tests
python3 scripts/run_phase_acceptance.py
python3 scripts/tw_law_mcp_stdio.py

The repository already includes host configuration:

• Codex App: .codex/config.toml

• Claude Code: .mcp.json

Secure Web pilot

Requirements: Node.js 22.x and Python 3.14 for the current CI path.

cd web
npm ci
npm run test:run
npm run typecheck
npm run lint
npm run build
npm start

In a second terminal, start the local worker:

python3 -m worker.secure_worker.server

Use web/.env.example and docs/runbook-secure-web.md for runtime modes, callback configuration, private storage, and external-credential gates. Production deployment is not implied by a green local build.

Example prompts

The safe pattern is to ask for a workflow artifact and its evidence boundary, not an unqualified legal conclusion.

Please run run_phase_acceptance with tw-law-mcp first.
Using only the masked document text and file metadata I provide, route this case
among drawing review, completion inspection, change-of-use plus completion inspection,
and simple interior renovation.
Return the procedure-stage confidence, human-confirmation questions, corpus packs,
artifacts, and reasons for anything you cannot determine.
Do not provide a legal opinion, compliance guarantee, fire-design conclusion,
material-authenticity conclusion, or approval promise.

Other useful requests:

• “Build a New Taipei completion-inspection submission packet and list missing evidence.”

• “Parse this masked correction notice into atomic items and produce a human-confirmation packet.”

• “Show the source IDs, as-of dates, failed gates, and unsupported claims behind this artifact.”

Current status

This is a public prototype, not a production compliance product.

The latest local and CI evidence is recorded in ACCEPTANCE.md. Missing external credentials are intentionally reported as pending; they are not replaced with synthetic “production accepted” claims.

Repository map

Research and design

• ARCHITECTURE.md — runtime topology, trust boundaries, state machines, and data classes.

• docs/ADR-0001-packaging-strategy.md — why standalone MCP comes before host-specific plugins.

• docs/ADR-0002-secure-web.md — single-user Secure Web decisions and production flip conditions.

• docs/cc-crossbeam-feature-matrix.md — relationship to the original cc-crossbeam workflow.

• docs/tw-scenario-feature-matrix.md — Taiwan scenario coverage and acceptance mapping.

• docs/runbook-secure-web.md — operational setup, backup, deletion, and incident response.

FAQ

Is this a legal-advice tool?

No. It organizes procedures, documents, sources, uncertainty, and questions for professionals. It does not issue legal opinions, compliance guarantees, or sign-off.

Can I upload a client PDF or drawing?

Not to the current authenticated worker. The pilot accepts UTF-8 TXT and metadata only. Raw files, title blocks, and unmasked personal information require an approved quarantine and parser policy first.

Why is the MCP server separate from the web app?

The domain and source-of-truth boundary should remain host-neutral. Codex, Claude Code, the Secure Web, and future consumers should call the same deterministic tools instead of copying legal logic into each surface.

Is the Secure Web production-ready?

No. Local acceptance is documented, while live Google/LINE credentials, public HTTPS acceptance, approved production storage/model adapters, official-source refresh, and real de-identified cases remain explicit gates.

Where did the workflow idea come from?

The product workflow is informed by cc-crossbeam's document-review and correction-response flow (see Related projects for its current status). The Taiwan corpus, jurisdiction rules, source policy, and safety boundaries are implemented independently for this repository.

Related projects

• cc-crossbeam — the original document-review and correction-response workflow that this repository's product design is informed by. It is not currently published as a public repository under this account, so no working link is available; the relationship is described in the FAQ above.

• AIhouskeeperagent — a related project from the same author, covering AI-assisted operations/housekeeping agent work.