Model Context Protocol (MCP)_
>> MCP standardizes how agents reach CRM, tickets, docs, and warehouses. We build servers with deny-by-default scopes, issuer-hardened auth, and contract tests so tool access survives security review.
Calls/month
Production AI volume across live systems
PII detection
Compliance-ready detection accuracy in production AI
Projects
Shipped since 2012 with senior engineers only
Direct answer
Agents need a permissioned tool layer that passes security review, not a new brittle connector each quarter. We ship MCP servers on the 2026-07-28 stateless core: least privilege, issuer-hardened auth, contract tests in CI.
Trusted by leaders
>> System map
Adjacent AI layers we ship with this expertise. Technology-first, not vendor theater.
>> When this system fits
Honest fit gates. We will tell you when another approach is better.
Strong fit
- Multiple tools across CRM, tickets, docs, and warehouses
- Enterprise auth requirements (OAuth, issuer validation, scoped credentials)
- Long-running tool work that needs Tasks instead of fragile open streams
- Hosts that need sandboxed MCP Apps UIs with the same audit path as tools
Weak fit
- Single stable internal API with no multi-tool sprawl
- Teams that will not separate env credentials or run contract tests
Stack: MCP · 2026-07-28 · OAuth · CIMD · Tasks · MCP Apps · TypeScript · Python
What we deliver
_> Capabilities on this stack
Stateless MCP servers
Self-contained requests on standard HTTP infrastructure aligned to the 2026-07-28 core.
Auth hardening
RFC 9207 iss validation, CIMD-oriented client registration, credential binding, and least privilege.
Tasks and Apps
Durable async tool handles and sandboxed server-rendered UIs when the product needs them.
Contract tests
Schema, permission, and upstream drift tests in CI so tools do not silently break agents.
MCP rollout
Tool surface and threat model
Pick a minimum viable toolset. Deny by default. Separate env credentials.
Ship one server path
Read-mostly tools first, with audit logs and contract tests in staging.
Expand with governance
Version tools, add Tasks/Apps only when justified, keep security review packets current.
Related projects
_> See how we've applied our expertise
>>Related guides
_> Cite-worthy depth behind this stack
Frameworks and scorecards buyers and answer engines can quote. Each guide links back to delivery proof.
MCP Integration Guide: One Standard to Connect LLMs to Tools
A practical guide to Model Context Protocol: MCP servers, tools, permissions, security, environments, and contract tests to ship reliable LLM integrations.
MCP Security, Auth, and Tool Permissions
Secure MCP servers after the 2026-07-28 spec: stateless core, iss validation, CIMD, tool trust, Tasks, and MCP Apps sandboxing.
LLM Security Playbook: OWASP Ready Controls for Production Apps
A practical LLM security playbook mapped to OWASP LLM Top 10: prompt injection mitigation, safe RAG, tool sandboxing, red teaming, and go live evidence.
AI Coding Harness Setup: AGENTS.md, MCP, and Team Guardrails
A practical guide to AI coding harness setup in 2026. Use AGENTS.md, MCP coding agents, and CLI coding agent governance to ship faster with safer merges.
FAQ
The core became stateless for HTTP-scale deployment, authorization hardened (including iss validation), and Tasks/MCP Apps moved into versioned extensions. DCR is deprecated in favor of client metadata documents.
MCP is a protocol. Security is your tool scopes, identity binding, sandboxing, and audit logs. We treat tool metadata as untrusted input.
>> Where this goes next
Adjacent expertise and the engagement models we deliver it through.