Community Outreach Kit
May 8, 2026 · View on GitHub
This file is for people sharing SACP with developers, open-source communities, and agent builders.
Chinese version: COMMUNITY_OUTREACH.zh-CN.md
Who To Reach
Start with people who already feel the pain:
- agent framework builders
- LangGraph / CrewAI / MCP / A2A users
- AI coding tool users
- open-source maintainers using AI agents
- people collecting hallucination or evaluation examples
- hackathon participants building agent skills
Do not lead with "a new protocol standard." Lead with a concrete failure:
An agent says "All tests passed."
Where is the evidence?
Short Post
I open-sourced SACP/0.1 + AgentOps Doctor.
It audits messy AI agent output and asks:
- Did it really finish?
- Where is the evidence?
- Who owns the next step?
- Did it cross a memory or human-approval boundary?
Run:
git clone https://github.com/aDragon0707/sacp.git
cd sacp
python agentops-doctor-skill/agentops_doctor.py agentops-doctor-skill/examples/unsupported_test_claim.md
No receipt, no trust.
Adoption Case Post
SACP now has a public-safe adoption case.
Longju, a local single-agent operator, uses SACP as a runtime guard:
PreTask -> ContextCheck -> PreExternalAction -> PostTask
The trials covered:
- false completion -> 412 missing_evidence
- prompt injection -> human approval required
- skill distillation -> candidate only
- duplicate handoff -> 204 no_action_needed
Case study:
https://github.com/aDragon0707/sacp/blob/main/ADOPTION_CASE_LONGJU.md
Ask For Feedback
Looking for messy agent outputs.
If your agent ever said "done", "tests passed", "saved to memory", or "ready to publish" without enough evidence, paste a sanitized example here:
https://github.com/aDragon0707/sacp/issues/new/choose
I want to turn real failure cases into Dirty Run tests.
Who To Tag
Tagging can help, but do it carefully. Prefer people and projects with direct interest in agents, evals, workflows, or protocols.
Good patterns:
- tag a framework when you add a concrete adapter proposal
- tag an expert when asking one specific technical question
- tag a community when asking for messy outputs or benchmark cases
Weak pattern:
- mass-tagging famous accounts with a vague announcement
OpenAI / Frontier Labs
It is reasonable to mention OpenAI, Anthropic, LangChain, Microsoft AutoGen, CrewAI, and other frontier-agent communities, but the ask should be concrete:
Would a receipt layer for agent completion claims be useful in your framework?
What evidence fields would you map from tool calls/checkpoints?
Community Targets
- GitHub: issues, discussions, related repos
- Hacker News: Show HN
- Reddit: r/LocalLLaMA, r/AI_Agents, r/LangChain, r/MachineLearning
- X / Twitter: agent builders, eval researchers, open-source maintainers
- Hugging Face forums
- LangChain / LangGraph community
- MCP / A2A developer communities
- Chinese communities: V2EX, 掘金, 知乎, 即刻, 开源中国, AI 开发者微信群
Best First Ask
Give me one messy agent output.
I will translate it into a SACP receipt and add it to the benchmark if it reveals a useful failure mode.