Every harness claims “ACP support.” Our probe asks a ruder question: which methods, exactly? Tonight's ledger records no implementations. Below: the league table — nineteen methods to a row — then the verified, the partial, and the limited. Click any name to open its case file.
PRESS ⌘K TO CONSULT THE INDEX
As printed after each probe run. + implemented / ± partial / − missing / · not exercised. The trailing lody column counts advertised _meta.lody extension features — it is annex evidence, not part of the score; the toggle strikes it from the record. A name may be clicked to subpoena its case file.
| HARNESS |
|---|
Standard ACP covers the handshake — not the job. Usage meters, rate limits, steering, subagent rosters, goal control, session history, compaction: every serious harness needs these, and today each answers privately — x.ai/* here, claudeCode.* there, jetbrains.air somewhere else. Same features, different dialects; a client that wants any of it ends up speaking all of them. The dossiers above now print every dialect we hear.
acp-extension-core is Lody's answer — the same feature set written down once, as an open, provider-neutral contract. Semantics ride as _meta.lody.<feature> on ordinary ACP envelopes; what the protocol genuinely can't express earns a _lody/* method, and every feature advertises its own integer version. The private dialects play this trick for one vendor each; this one plays it for everyone — documented, versioned, and readable by any client, not just Lody's.
A ◆ lody mark means that row runs Lody's adapter — native behavior translated into this same contract, so one client implementation serves every provider. Details live in the repos:
“If you advertise a method, implement it — leave it silently absent and it's the protocol itself, and the rest of us clients, that get yelled at.” — OVERHEARD IN THE CLIENT MINES, NOW PRINTED IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST READ THE METHOD · AUDIT THE TRANSCRIPTS · FILE AN APPEAL ON GITHUB ↗