Aperture
A commitment tripwire · git hook · CI · CLI · MCP
Did an agent quietly drop a commitment from your spec — and no one noticed?

English · 简体中文
AI agents now rewrite the documents that govern your work — specs, plans, ADRs, charters,
AGENTS.md files. Somewhere in the edit, a constraint you set earlier can quietly disappear.
Aperture is a commitment tripwire. You name the commitments you care about; it flags —
word for word — when one of them vanishes between two versions of a decision document.
Catching "a commitment silently vanished" is a tripwire job: it should fire on an event,
deterministically, without asking permission. So Aperture ships that check on the surface that fits
it best first — a git pre-commit hook / CI check that runs with no LLM, offline — and also as
a CLI and an MCP server for agents to call mid-task. MCP is one adapter, not the whole
product.
A signal, not a judge. It trips; you investigate.
Opt-in · runs locally · never trains on your data.
What it is (and what it is not)
Aperture compares two text states of the same decision — an earlier version and a later one — and
surfaces a narrow, specific kind of decision drift: when a tracked commitment’s exact text
disappeared. One engine, several surfaces:
- git pre-commit hook / CI check — the deterministic form. Fires on the commit / PR event with no
model in the loop, and blocks (or warns) automatically.
aperture check CLI — run the same check by hand between any two git states.
- MCP server — so an agent can call the check while it edits (weaker as a tripwire, since it only
runs if the agent chooses to call it — but useful mid-task).
What the engine does and doesn’t do:
- ✅ It does: flag when a commitment you listed verbatim is present in version A and gone
from version B — across commits, sessions, or authors. It returns a structured, comparable
result with its own blind spots written on the label.
- ❌ It does not: understand meaning. It matches text as a case-insensitive substring, so it
misses a commitment that was reworded / softened / paraphrased (it looks dropped-free even
though the promise weakened); it declines/abstains on a commitment that was merely translated
(it can’t compare verbatim across scripts, so it returns
degraded rather than false-flag); and it
can still false-flag a commitment that was merely reformatted (the words moved, the meaning
didn’t). It does not rank options, score quality, or tell you a change was wrong. That judgment
stays with you. Moving to the deterministic git-hook makes the check fire reliably — it does
not widen what it can see. Same narrow, verbatim signal.
If you want one sentence: Aperture is grep for vanished commitments, wired to fire on commit —
and honest enough to admit what it can’t see.
Quickstart (≈2 minutes)
pip install aperture-mcp
The PyPI package is named aperture-mcp because the bare name aperture was already taken on
PyPI. The -mcp suffix is a historical package-name artifact — the product is Aperture, and
MCP is only one of its surfaces. One pip install gives you all three below.
1. The deterministic tripwire — git pre-commit hook / CI (no LLM, offline)
Create a .aperture.toml — a watchlist of the commitments that must not silently vanish, per file:
fail_on_drop = true
[[watch]]
path = "CHARTER.md"
commitments = ["never train on your data", "data stays on the device"]
aperture check compares two git states and flags any watched commitment that disappeared
verbatim:
aperture check
aperture check --staged
aperture check --ref-a origin/main --ref-b HEAD
Exit code 1 blocks the commit when a watched commitment dropped (the default);
--warn-only prints the finding but never blocks. It’s stdlib-only, makes no network calls, and runs
no model.
Wire it as a pre-commit hook — either through the pre-commit framework
(uses this repo’s .pre-commit-hooks.yaml):
repos:
- repo: https://github.com/jaysinailabs/aperture-mcp
rev: v0.2.0
hooks:
- id: aperture-commitment-drift
…or as a standalone .git/hooks/pre-commit:
#!/bin/sh
exec aperture check --staged
…or run it in CI as a GitHub Action on every PR (needs fetch-depth: 0 so both
sides are available — see examples/github-action/aperture-check.yml):
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
with: { fetch-depth: 0 }
- run: pip install aperture-mcp
- run: aperture check --ref-a ${{ github.event.pull_request.base.sha }} --ref-b ${{ github.sha }}
Kick the tires first with the bundled fixture (clone the repo): it trips on a dropped commitment
against checked-in before/after docs, no setup, fully offline —
python3 examples/git_decision_drift/git_decision_drift.py.
2. Mid-task, from an agent — the MCP server
The same check, callable by an agent while it edits. (An MCP tool only fires if the agent chooses
to call it — a weaker delivery for a tripwire than the git-hook, but handy mid-task.)
{
"mcpServers": {
"aperture-mcp": { "command": "aperture-mcp" }
}
}
Prefer zero-install? Point the client at uvx instead:
{ "command": "uvx", "args": ["aperture-mcp"] }.
3. Or from your own Python
from aperture import compare, Anchor, AnchorKind
result = compare(
state_a="We commit to: ci-gates-green before release; data-never-leaves-device.",
state_b="We commit to: data-never-leaves-device.",
anchors=[Anchor(kind=AnchorKind.COMMITMENT, id="ci-gates-green")],
)
print(result.status)
print(result.anchor_violations)
A scene you’ll recognize
On a long task, your agent keeps rewriting the doc it works from — a plan, a spec — across sessions
and edits. And every so often, a line that mattered just… vanishes.
“Always ask before you delete anything.” Gone.
“User data never leaves the device.” Gone.
“The free tier stays free.” Gone.
Nobody meant to drop them; nobody reads all 400 lines of the diff.
Aperture watches the exact lines you name. Put it on the commit — a hook that fires before the drop
lands — and it won’t try to understand the doc or judge it; it just tells you which promise was there,
word for word, and now isn’t. A tripwire, not a judge — and honest about the rest: soften a line,
reword it, or change a number instead of deleting it, and it’ll slip past. Better you hear that now.
What trips it — and what slips past
Aperture is a heuristic. We measured it on our own gold corpus and we publish the numbers instead
of a single flattering score, because knowing where it’s blind is the product —
recall 0.400, precision 0.667 on a 100-case corpus, labeled by an isolated LLM-judge panel (it
catches 26 of 65 real drifts; ~1 flag in 3 is noise), full breakdown in
docs/measured-limits.md:
| A watched commitment deleted verbatim | ✅ Reliably — this is the one thing it’s good at (24 of 24 in the corpus) |
| A commitment reworded / softened (“must” → “should”) | ❌ Missed — the text still “matches” |
| A commitment paraphrased / restructured | ❌ Missed |
| A number / scope / negation quietly changed | ❌ Missed |
| A commitment translated to another language | ⚠️ Declines (abstains) for a natural-language anchor — it can’t compare verbatim across scripts, so it returns degraded rather than false-flag (a commitment dropped and translated is missed) |
The deterministic surface doesn’t widen the aperture. The git-hook fires reliably — but it still
only catches verbatim deletion. Every ❌ / ⚠️ row above is exactly as blind through the hook as
through MCP. What you gain is when it checks (on the commit, without anyone remembering to ask),
not what it can see.
Anchor style matters for that last row: the abstain applies to a natural-language anchor. A
code-identifier anchor (the ci-gates-green style the quickstart teaches) is treated as
translation-stable — Aperture keeps checking it across languages, so if that exact token disappears
it still flags DROPPED_SILENTLY (usually what you want for a stable identifier).
Takeaway: treat every flag as “look here,” never as “this is wrong” — and never assume
silence means nothing drifted. Aperture catches the verbatim disappearance case well and is
honest that it catches little else. That narrow, reliable signal is useful precisely because
it doesn’t pretend to be more.
Hit one of those misses on your own docs? That's the single most useful thing you can send us —
report it in ~30s (your wording is optional). Real misses guide what
we fix next.
Why not just git diff / grep? You can reproduce the core check by hand. What Aperture adds is
that it’s wired to fire on the commit / PR event (as a hook or CI check) and callable
mid-task by an agent (over MCP); it returns a structured, directional result
(ok / degraded / DROPPED_SILENTLY / …); and it reports its own blind spots in the result
so a human can audit the gaps. It’s ergonomics + honesty around a simple, legible check — not a
smarter detector.
Why this exists
Long-running and multi-agent workflows drift. A constraint set in turn 3 / session 1 / by agent A
gets quietly edited away forty turns later, in another session, by agent B — and nobody notices
until it ships. Aperture is a preflight you can put on the documents agents maintain: name the
commitments that must not silently vanish, and get a tripwire when one does — ideally on the commit
itself, before the drop ever lands.
It is deliberately small and legible. It is not an AI that decides for you; it is a signal that
helps you stay consistent with yourself.
Who it’s for
Teams and builders who (a) let AI agents edit repo-resident decision documents — specs, plans,
ADRs, charters, and AGENTS.md files — and (b) keep those documents under version control.
If your agents touch text that encodes promises, Aperture gives you a cheap, honest tripwire — on the
commit, in CI, or mid-task — on the ones you can’t afford to lose silently.
Privacy
- Opt-in and local. Aperture runs on your machine — the git-hook, the CLI, and the MCP server
alike. It makes no network calls.
- Never trains on your data. Your decision text is yours; it never leaves your process.
- Usage logging is off by default and, when enabled, records only metadata (timestamp,
tool, status, counts) — never your decision text or commitment wording.
Honesty about the demo
The repository ships a small hand-authored fixture ADR (a before/after pair under
examples/git_decision_drift/fixtures/), where Aperture
correctly flags a commitment we deliberately retired and stays quiet on one we kept. It is a faithful
illustration of the mechanism — but it is a sample of one that we author and judge ourselves. It
demonstrates how the tripwire works, not that the signal is strong. For the latter, see the
measured per-family numbers above and in
docs/measured-limits.md.
We have zero external adopters yet — if you run Aperture on your own decision docs, we’d love to
hear what it caught and what it missed.
Project status
Early, pre-1.0, not yet a production gate. The compare contract (v0.2) is frozen and covered
by a conformance suite; the package API may still move. See VERSIONING.md for the
compatibility policy and CHANGELOG.md for changes.
Hit a miss? Help it improve
Aperture will miss things — that's by design (it's blind to reworded, softened, and translated
commitments, on every surface). When it misses a drift you cared about, or false-flags a rewrite,
telling us is the single most valuable contribution:
- ~30 seconds, no account/usage data, your wording is optional →
open a drift-case report.
- Real misses tell us which blind spot to fix next, and — only if you choose to share the wording —
can become cases in the gold corpus that keeps the numbers in
docs/measured-limits.md honest.
We never auto-collect anything (see Privacy); this happens only when you choose to share.
Questions, or "is this the right tool for my case?" → GitHub Discussions.
More ways to help: CONTRIBUTING.md.
License
Apache-2.0.