I build Canli Capital: free, open-source tools that check whether a backtest is real (deflated Sharpe, overfitting and data-snooping tests), plus SEC fundamentals for AI agents over MCP.
Good to see the disclosure up front and the dataset open. One thing on reading the percentages: with 37 money-moving servers, the intervals are wide. 4 of 37 budgets is 11% with a 95% Wilson interval of roughly 4% to 25%; 6 of 37 approvals is 16% (about 8% to 31%); the single velocity-limit server is 3% (about 0.5% to 14%). So "very few" holds, but "human approval is more common than a budget" does not separate at this sample size, and neither does the 20/25 community versus 17/24 official gap (80% vs 71%, intervals overlapping heavily).
The criterion is also one-sided in a useful way: "documents" can only undercount, so these are floors. I'd add one column that is checkable the same way and matters more to an agent builder: whether the money-moving tools are separable from the read-only ones (an allowlist of tool names, or a read-only mode), since that is the control you can apply from the client side even when the server has no budget. How many of the 37 expose a read-only flag?
Grandparents and family read Persian children's stories aloud on video, so kids growing up far from home keep their mother tongue in a voice they love. Real family voices, never AI.
You are right, and thank you for doing the intervals. At n=37, "approval is more common than a budget" does not separate, and neither does the community vs. official gap; I should not have implied either. "Very few document a budget" holds, and since "documents" can only undercount, these are floors.
The read-only / tool-allowlist column is a good one because it is the control a client can apply even when the server has none. I do not have that count yet, so I have proposed it on the repo together with showing the intervals in the README: github.com/Pink-Agentic-Payments/p...
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Good to see the disclosure up front and the dataset open. One thing on reading the percentages: with 37 money-moving servers, the intervals are wide. 4 of 37 budgets is 11% with a 95% Wilson interval of roughly 4% to 25%; 6 of 37 approvals is 16% (about 8% to 31%); the single velocity-limit server is 3% (about 0.5% to 14%). So "very few" holds, but "human approval is more common than a budget" does not separate at this sample size, and neither does the 20/25 community versus 17/24 official gap (80% vs 71%, intervals overlapping heavily).
The criterion is also one-sided in a useful way: "documents" can only undercount, so these are floors. I'd add one column that is checkable the same way and matters more to an agent builder: whether the money-moving tools are separable from the read-only ones (an allowlist of tool names, or a read-only mode), since that is the control you can apply from the client side even when the server has no budget. How many of the 37 expose a read-only flag?
You are right, and thank you for doing the intervals. At n=37, "approval is more common than a budget" does not separate, and neither does the community vs. official gap; I should not have implied either. "Very few document a budget" holds, and since "documents" can only undercount, these are floors.
The read-only / tool-allowlist column is a good one because it is the control a client can apply even when the server has none. I do not have that count yet, so I have proposed it on the repo together with showing the intervals in the README: github.com/Pink-Agentic-Payments/p...