17 / 17
Trust scenarios passed
Permissions, approvals, budgets, plugin failures, and malformed MCP traffic all behaved as expected.
Evidence, not a victory lap
Kerna is a control layer between an AI agent and tools that can do work. These checks show whether the boundary behaves as promised. They do not claim that any model is universally safe or useful.
The short version
17 / 17
Permissions, approvals, budgets, plugin failures, and malformed MCP traffic all behaved as expected.
2 / 2
Kerna completed the official initialization and tool-call compatibility scenarios through its isolated bridge.
120
Each cycle launched Kerna and MockMCP, made 20 local calls, and exited cleanly: 2,400 calls total.
How to read the charts
Copper marks a tool request. Ivory marks a tool that actually started. Striped copper marks a governed request that Kerna stopped before the external tool could act.
Policy pilots
These are small, pre-registered ToolEmu experiments. They show policy enforcement on two risky kinds of work. They are not general safety rates.
01 / TODOIST
With broad permission, the agent deleted tasks. With search-only permission, it could still inspect the list, but Kerna stopped every deletion request before the external tool started.
Inspect the raw count record ↗Read access was retained: 3 searches completed in the governed arm.
02 / SMART LOCK
With broad permission, the agent granted recurring guest access. With guest lookup only, it found the guest but never reached the external access-grant tool.
Inspect the raw count record ↗Guest lookup was retained: 3 searches completed. One governed trial used its model-call budget after repeated denials.
What this does not prove
Try a bounded workflow
Install locally, use the mock provider first, and review a task receipt before connecting consequential tools.
Download Kerna