Two Independent CCS Implementations Achieve 14/14 Interoperability

Two independent implementations of the Correctover Conformance Shape (CCS) specification, an IETF Internet-Draft defining a runtime verification framework for AI agent tool calls, have achieved 14/14 interoperability. The implementations, correctover 2.4.9 and the ccs-verifier Python package, pass all conformance checks, demonstrating the specification is sufficient for independent implementation. The achievement is seen as strong evidence for advancing the draft to Experimental RFC status.

The Correctover Conformance Shape CCS specification — IETF Internet-Draft draft-correctover-ccs-06 , Experimental status — defines a runtime verification framework for AI agent tool calls across seven dimensions: Structure, Schema, Latency, Cost, Identity, Integrity, and Security. As of August 2026, two independent implementations from separate codebases now pass all 14 conformance checks. This post documents what was achieved and what it means. correctover at version 2.4.9 ccs-verifier Python package 5fb2eae9b20d17685e1ecbe061eb4ced03dbe64e The EMILIA runner is located at conformance/composition/ccs-v13-aeb-v1 in the emilia-protocol repository. The EMILIA runner passes all 14 checks: params hash The v1.3 receipt contains 22 fields. A detached Ed25519 signature is computed over the RFC 8785 canonical JSON serialization of fields 1–21. Field 22 carries the signature itself and is excluded from the signing input. Key mechanisms: ensure ascii=False to maintain proper Unicode handling during canonicalization.The -06 revision includes several substantive clarifications: ensure ascii=False is required for RFC 8785 compliance; the previous text did not make this explicit. response hash the receipt is updated with the response digest after the action completes .The IETF's founding principle is "rough consensus and running code." Two independent implementations from separate codebases achieving 14/14 on the conformance suite is the strongest available evidence that the specification text is sufficient to build an interoperable implementation without reference to the author's own code. This is the bar for an Experimental RFC: demonstrate that the protocol can be built independently and that independent builds agree. It is important to be precise about scope: Interoperability testing confirms that the specification is implementable from the text alone. It does not, by itself, prove production readiness, security at scale, or real-world deployment. Those are separate questions that require separate evidence.