Meridian — where trust is measured, not claimed. An open protocol for reputation-routed trust networks.
NOTE — Archive the spec as a conceptual reference for behavioral trust primitives in multi-agent systems; revisit only when implementation materializes.
7/24 — stale-risk / under-documented / no-signals
Failed: H1: FAIL — no tagged release exists H2: FAIL — no release at all H4: FAIL — last commit 2026-03-30, 48 days before appraisal date, exceeds 30-day threshold H6: FAIL — 0 open issues, probe requires >0 (sign of active triage) H8: FAIL — no CI badge, no reference to .github/workflows/ anywhere in README
Passed: H3: PASS — last commit 2026-03-30, 48 days ago, within 6-month window H5: PASS — archived: false confirmed H7: PASS — MIT license explicitly stated
Failed: D3: FAIL — no install, setup, or getting-started instructions; README explicitly states "Pre-alpha. Protocol design phase" with no runnable artifact D4: FAIL — no code block under any heading matching usage, example, quickstart, or getting started; architecture section contains ASCII diagram only D5: FAIL — no API, Configuration, Options, Reference, Commands, or Parameters heading present D7: FAIL — external links point to a deployed service (pii-scrub) and org homepage (northwoodssentinel.com), not a docs site, wiki, or /docs directory D8: FAIL — no Limitations, Caveats, Known Issues, Trade-offs, or Not Supported section
Passed: D1: PASS — README is present and non-empty D2: PASS — README is several KB of substantive prose, well above 1000-byte threshold D6: PASS — first paragraph states "Meridian is an open protocol for reputation-routed trust networks. It defines how independent AI agents (daemons) observe, score, and propagate trust based on actual behavior" — clear purpose within first 500 chars
Failed: E1: FAIL — primary language is "unknown"; no code committed to determine type system E2: FAIL — dependency manifest explicitly listed as "Not available" E3: FAIL — no manifest to evaluate dependency count E4: FAIL — no mention of tests, test frameworks, or CI test steps in README E5: FAIL — 1 star, threshold is 50 E6: FAIL — created 2026-03-24, ~54 days to appraisal date (~1.8 months); 1 star / 1.8 months ≈ 0.56 stars/month, below threshold of 2 E7: FAIL — 0 forks, threshold is 5
Passed: E8: PASS — description "Meridian — where trust is measured, not claimed. An open protocol for reputation-routed trust networks." is non-null, >20 chars, and meaningfully distinct from the repo name
| Dimension | Score | Assessment |
|---|---|---|
| Harvest Value | 1 | The conceptual primitives — daemon interaction records, multi-dimensional trust vectors with temporal decay, domain-specific trust scoping, and Sybil-resistance via behavioral cost — are intellectually interesting patterns for multi-agent design; however, all exist only as prose descriptions with no algorithm specification or implementable artifact to extract. |
| Integration Readiness | 0 | The repo contains zero code; "What exists today: This spec" confirms there is nothing to install, import, or call — any integration would require building the entire protocol from scratch against a future formal spec. |
| Overlap Risk | 0 | No vault entry covers decentralized reputation protocols or behavioral trust networks; NorthwoodsSentinel--brook overlaps only in the daemon-ecosystem origin, not in trust-scoring functionality, confirming this is a genuinely novel category. |
| Gap Fill | 1 | The vault's multi-agent orchestration entries (brook, gastownhall, voltagent) address agent coordination but none address inter-agent trust and reputation routing; this fills an undeclared but real conceptual gap, though it does not appear in the landscape Gaps section as a named need. |
Composite: 0.5
Category: Decentralized Trust Protocol Crowding: 0 repos in vault (first-in-category) Alternatives: first in this category vs. top alternative: N/A — no vault repo addresses reputation-routed trust networks or behavioral scoring between autonomous agents Landscape impact: filling a gap — introduces a new category with no prior coverage in the vault
Density: 6/10 — Available: full README (~5KB substantive prose), repo metadata (stars, forks, issues, dates, license, archived status), description, landscape context summary, related prior appraisals (NorthwoodsSentinel--loam, NorthwoodsSentinel--brook ecosystem context); Missing: source code files, dependency manifest, CI configuration, release notes, contributor list, commit history detail, language detection data, test infrastructure evidence
This repo is the conceptual upstream for the NorthwoodsSentinel daemon ecosystem (brook, loam, PII Scrub). The protocol design — particularly the observation-signed trust vector with domain-scoping and temporal decay — maps naturally onto the daemon fleet already documented in the vault. If a formal spec or reference SDK appears in a future commit, this warrants immediate re-appraisal for STUDY or INTEGRATE elevation. The business model framing (protocol as commons, services as revenue) mirrors the Linux/Red Hat and TCP/IP analogies accurately and suggests the author has thought carefully about open-protocol sustainability, which is a positive signal for long-term viability if implementation follows.