Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Positioning design-science preprint proposes a framework to ensure operational assurance in MCP workflows, suggesting gaps in evidence and control.
Composable Model Context Protocol (MCP) workflows require assurance beyond endpoint reachability. This position and design-science preprint defines observable objects and bounded closure conditions for three related problems: the Registry-Runtime Gap, pre-execution and runtime Composition-Control Gaps, and the Execution-Outcome Gap between provider-reported success and evidence of the intended target state. The framework separates controls required by a plan, controls evidenced as configured before execution, and controls observed during or after an execution trace. It replaces an ordinal verification-tier model with non-ordered Outcome Evidence Source Classes evaluated across source authority, organizational independence, technical failure independence, cryptographic integrity, temporal proximity, identity binding, and observation completeness. A fully synthetic support-notice workflow demonstrates how missing task cancellation, provider substitution, and contradictory delivery evidence leave different gaps open. The accompanying public design supplement provides a generic Operational Assurance Profile JSON Schema, a synthetic example, bounded structural validation, and tests. SaSame is included only as an author-reported, status-bounded design case frozen at an exact internal branch snapshot. Observation and evidence components existed on main, while plan contracts, provider observation, dynamic resolution, composition planning, deterministic adapters, and a read-only execution lab existed only in an unmerged, non-production prototype. The paper does not claim that SaSame reduces risk, safely composes tools in production, or has established external-customer validity. Research status: Preprint v0.3.0. This work has not been peer reviewed. The proposed profile has not been validated for policy utility or inter-rater reliability, and no controlled comparative experiment currently establishes production effectiveness. Data and code availability: The accompanying supplement contains only a generic schema, a fully synthetic example, standard-library validation code, tests, citation metadata, and publication-boundary notices. It excludes private SaSame implementation, endpoint or observation data, provider-selection and composition logic, production security controls, credentials, customer information, internal infrastructure, pricing, entitlements, and commercial fulfillment systems. Conflict of interest: The author is affiliated with SaSame S.R.L., which designs and operates the case-study systems and offers commercial MCP services. The SaSame case is not an independent evaluation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kevin Fukui (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: