How CheckedAgent inspects every message.

Two independent pipelines — one inspecting everything your agents send, one inspecting everything their tools send back. Every stage of both, and what each is built to catch.

The multi-tier pipeline, both directions.

Every MCP message — request and response — passes through an independent stack of detectors.

Agent
MCP client
CheckedAgent inspection layer
Request pipeline
T1Policy
T2Patterns
T3Obfusc.
T4Semantic
T5Behavior
T6SLM
Response pipeline
R5Behavior
R4Content
R3Envelope
R2Classifier
R1Wire guards
Tools
MCP servers
  • Bidirectional MCP inspection
  • Inline enforcement
  • Hash-chained audit log
  • SIEM-streamed
— The request pipeline

What the agent sends.

TIER1POLICY

Your policy, before detection runs.

Tenant-scoped business rules — agent permissions, identity scopes, tool boundaries, time windows, rate limits. Pre-built defaults or fully custom; respected by every tier downstream.

POLICY PACKSCUSTOM RULESTENANT-SCOPED
Position
Gateway edge, pre-detection.
Every message enters here.
TIER2PATTERN MATCH

Threat signatures.

Pattern matching across the full known-attack corpus — prompt injections, credential theft attempts, URL exfiltration, command injection. Maintained against the relevant threat catalogues.

PROMPT INJECTIONCREDENTIAL THEFTURL EXFILCMD INJECTION
Catches
Known attack patterns
Across 28 categories.
TIER3OBFUSCATION

Catches what's hiding in plain sight.

Attacks that disguise themselves: Unicode tricks, base64 and hex encoding, invisible characters, homoglyph substitution, RTL overrides. Decoded and normalised before re-inspection.

UNICODEHOMOGLYPHINVISIBLE CHARSRTL OVERRIDE
Catches
Disguised threats
Unicode, encoding, homoglyph evasion.
TIER4SEMANTIC AI

Understanding meaning, not just text.

AI-powered semantic analysis catches polite-but-malicious intent — the attack that reads as a normal request to a regex but is engineered to subvert the agent's reasoning. Detection runs against contrastive pairs — attack examples scored against a calibrated benign corpus where grey-zone cases are explicitly tagged with the attack category they're designed to disambiguate. Coverage maps to OWASP Agentic Top 10 and MITRE ATLAS, so every signal carries a technique ID your SOC already recognises.

INTENT PARSINGROLE CONFUSIONSOCIAL ENG.
Catches
Polite-but-malicious
Novel paraphrases, intent-based attacks.
TIER5BEHAVIOURAL

Agent-level fraud detection.

Tracks what each agent normally does — message volume, tool mix, time-of-day, sender geography, parameter ranges — and flags anomalies. The agent that suddenly tries to read the entire customer table at 3am gets stopped.

VOLUME ANOMALYTOOL DRIFTPRIVILEGE ESCALATION
Catches
Behavioural drift
Anomalies vs. agent's own baseline.
TIER6CLASSIFIER

The final checkpoint.

A small, fast AI model trained specifically on security threats — not a generalist LLM. Used for the residual edge cases the deterministic tiers couldn't decide on.

DEDICATED MODEL< 50MSPASS / BLOCK / ESCALATE
Verdict
Final adjudication
Grey-zone cases the deterministic tiers couldn't decide.
— The response pipeline

What the tool sends back.

The request side asks whether a message is a known attack. The response side asks a different question: does what came back match what was asked — and is it safe for the agent, the user, and every downstream system? Five stages, every one correlated to the request that triggered it.

STAGER1WIRE GUARDS

The response, bracketed at the wire.

Before any content is parsed, size caps, decompression-ratio limits, and nesting-depth checks bound what a tool can return. An expansion bomb or a response that violates the rate floor is stopped here, before it can exhaust the agent or hide a payload in sheer volume.

SIZE CAPSEXPANSION BOMBNESTING DEPTHRATE FLOOR
Position
Wire edge, pre-parse
Every response enters here.
STAGER2CLASSIFIER

Sort the message, route each block.

Every response is classified — a normal result, a notification, or a server-initiated request — and each content block is routed by where it is going. A block destined for the model is inspected differently from a URL the agent might fetch or a file a human will open. The routing decides which detectors run.

MESSAGE CLASSBLOCK ROUTINGSERVER-INITIATEDCAPABILITY SNAPSHOT
Routes to
Four sink tracks
Right detectors, right destination.
STAGER3ENVELOPE

The shape has to be right.

Version-aware validation of the JSON-RPC envelope: the response must match the protocol version negotiated at initialize, carry no unexpected fields, and arrive within a plausible time window for the tool. Structural anomalies surface before content inspection even begins.

VERSION-AWAREUNKNOWN FIELDSTIMING ANOMALYTOOL PROFILE
Validates
Protocol envelope
Conforms to what was negotiated.
STAGER4CONTENT

Inspected by where it's going.

Content is inspected by destination, not just by pattern. Track A scans model-visible text for instruction injection, soft influence, hidden Unicode, leaked credentials, and execution bait. Track B validates structured data against the tool's declared output schema — catching responses that violate it, tools that declare a schema then return text to evade it, and field values that don't fit their role, like a shell command in a description or an injection payload in an ID. Track C treats every returned URL as a deferred attack — blocking dangerous schemes, private-network targets, credentials in query strings, and path traversal. Track D catches what a human or downstream system will render: inline scripts, CSV formula injection, Trojan-Source bidi, SVG-embedded JavaScript.

TRACK A · MODEL TEXTTRACK B · SCHEMATRACK C · URIsTRACK D · RENDERED
Catches
Per-destination threats
Scaled to payload size, up to streaming.
STAGER5BEHAVIOUR

Does the answer fit the question?

The stage that has no request-side equivalent. Every response is compared against the request that triggered it: do the IDs and parameters that were asked for actually appear? Is the response proportionate in size and sensitivity to what was requested? Does a read-only query come back with instructions to act, foreign-tenant identifiers, or unexpected side effects? Individually clean content that doesn't match the request is exactly how a compromised tool hides — this is where it surfaces.

PARAMETER BINDINGSCOPE & SENSITIVITYTENANT BOUNDARYDEFERRED-ACTION
Correlates
Request ↔ response
The compromised-server catch.

What we catch.

Two surfaces, two purpose-built detector sets. Both fire inline before the agent or the tool sees the message — every signal logged for audit.

REQUEST SIDE / synchronous
What the agent is about to send
  • Prompt injection — Direct attempts to override the agent's task or extract its system prompt.
  • Indirect injection — Instructions hidden inside untrusted documents, emails, search results.
  • Credential harvest — Patterns that exfiltrate API keys, tokens, secrets.
  • Homoglyph & Unicode obfuscation — Visually-similar characters used to bypass naive filters.
  • The Lethal Trifecta — Combinations of sensitive data, untrusted input, and external communication.
RESPONSE SIDE / synchronous
What the tool returned
  • Compromised tool responses — Instructions disguised as data.
  • Rug-pull tool definitions — Tool descriptions changing behavior between calls or sessions.
  • Response social engineering — Plausible responses that redirect the agent off-task.
  • Outbound exfiltration channels — Side-channels disguised as legitimate tool calls.
  • Typosquat MCP servers — Server identity verified on first contact, change-detected thereafter.
CROSS-SESSION / asynchronous
What only shows up across time, sessions, or tenants — surfaced post-hoc via the audit chain
  • Shadow agents — Unsanctioned agents calling sanctioned tools under stolen or borrowed identity. Detected by behavioral fingerprint drift across sessions.
  • Zombie leaks — Slow exfiltration spread across many low-signal calls that pass any single-message check. Detected by aggregate volumetrics across the audit chain.

Mapped to every framework that matters.

Every detection in the pipeline carries a technique ID and a category mapping. OWASP for the threat taxonomy your SOC already speaks. MITRE ATLAS for kill-chain analysis. The compliance frameworks your auditor will ask about. We publish the mappings — your team verifies coverage, not us.

THREAT TAXONOMY
OWASP LLM Top 10

Every detection pattern carries an OWASP LLM Top 10 category ID, so each alert lands in the taxonomy your SOC already speaks. The mapping is regenerated against the current codebase on every release — and published for your team to check.

KILL-CHAIN
MITRE ATLAS

Every alert ships with its MITRE ATLAS technique ID, so it drops straight into the kill-chain analysis your threat hunters already run — from prompt injection through tool-based exfiltration.

RESPONSE-SIDE
Production response gates

The MCP response path runs an independent inspection pipeline. Each gate carries Adversa AI MCP, OWASP, MITRE ATLAS, and CWE category metadata — schema drift, rug pulls, instruction injection in tool results, undeclared capability use, transport substitution.

EU REGULATION
EU AI Act

Article 12 — high-risk system logging. Article 13 — transparency obligations. Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 — high-risk enforcement deferred to December 2027 under the Digital Omnibus.

CONTROL MAPPING
SOC 2 & ISO/IEC 27001 controls

The tamper-evident audit chain produces evidence mapped to the control families your auditor works from — SOC 2 security, availability and confidentiality criteria, and ISO/IEC 27001 Annex A.12 (logging) and A.16 (incident management) — so the evidence is ready when your attestation work begins. The controls map to CheckedAgent; the certification stays yours.

VERIFIABLE
Published mappings

Detection-category-to-framework matrices are versioned and public. Reproduce them against our regression corpus in your environment before you sign anything.

Every verdict, logged.

The Detection Event Log is the single timeline of every agent communication CheckedAgent has inspected. Pass, block, or flag — every record carries the agent identity, the threat signature, the tier that caught it, and a cryptographic signature.

SOC live feed
Real-time detection across request + response pipelines
StreamingLast 24 hours
Total events
1,847
76.9 / hr avg
Blocked
23
1.2% of events
Quarantined
41
2.2% of events
Critical alerts
3
last 24h
Detection rate
99.1%
pipeline healthy
Event volume by severity
CriticalHighWarningInfo
Top categories (246)
  • Prompt Injection87
  • Instruction Injection64
  • Schema Drift41
  • Data Exfiltration28
  • Deferred Execution Hold15
  • Credential Harvesting11
24 other categoriesSEE
Live event feed
All severities All pipelines All types
TIMEPIPELINECATEGORYDETAILSSCOREAGENT
  • 14:23:07RESPInstruction InjectionPI-INJECT-003 · postgres_query92agent-v6-84
  • 14:22:51REQRequest Data ExfiltrationPI-EXFIL-007 · http_fetch81agent-v6-84
  • 14:22:44RESPSchema DriftRESP_SCHEMA_DRIFT · slack_api.post58agent-v5-12
  • 14:22:38REQRequest Prompt InjectionPI-OVERRIDE-003 · filesystem.write87agent-v6-84
  • 14:22:31RESPDeferred Execution HoldRESP_DEFERRED · shell.exec58agent-v2-87
  • 14:22:24REQServer Identity DriftTOFU drift score: 12 · api_gateway32agent-v5-12
— Request a demo

Every Agent action.
Checked.

30-minute walkthrough with a security engineer — not a sales rep. We'll show the full pipeline, run your suspected attack patterns through it, and answer the questions your auditor is already asking.