Proposed specificationSource-located exemplarH1

Broker

Mediate discovery and invocation across boundaries.

JOIN POINTservice_discovery_invocationRECORD STATUSCandidate · v0.1.0

UML class view

The proposed contract drawn as participant roles, received calls, and numbered dependencies.

Object interactions

The same roles and calls as a class collaboration and a numbered message sequence.

Object interaction diagram for Broker, showing role collaboration and a numbered message sequence — FIG. C04 / OBJECT INTERACTIONS
Open full SVG Download PDF

Pointcut

Where the mechanism applies. All four dimensions belong to the proposed match, not just its vocabulary.

Context: A caller invokes a service or provider without direct construction.
Trigger: A service description is registered or a request is addressed.
Structure: Registry, service description, transport, request/reply, and error mapping.
Effect: Broker resolves a compatible endpoint and returns a correlated response.

Protected contract

The obligation that clients, operators, and auditors should be able to rely on.

Requires: Provider identity and versioned service description are available.
Ensures: Client and provider agree on schema or return incompatibility.
Invariant: Broker discovery does not bypass authentication or trust boundaries.
Violation: Provider absence, timeout, partial reply, and schema mismatch are explicit.

Negative control

A local factory returning implementations is only a registry cue.

Variation & lifecycle

The hot spot is admitted only where the protected semantics survive.

Permitted variation

Tool registry, provider registry, cross-process broker, and service mesh.

Test obligation

Test discovery, missing provider, version mismatch, timeout, and reconnect.

Evolution question

Did local registries evolve into cross-process service brokers?

Prompt + code design

An illustrative prompt and a small design sketch for the proposed contract. Names and APIs are invented; this is not a repository excerpt.

PROMPT SKETCH

Resolve a provider by identity and versioned service description. The client and provider must agree on the schema or return an explicit incompatibility, never a guessed call.

CODE DESIGN / PYTHON

def invoke(service_id, request, registry):
    provider = registry.resolve(service_id)
    if provider is None:
        return Incompatible(service_id, reason="not registered")
    if not provider.schema.accepts(request):
        return Incompatible(service_id, reason="schema mismatch")
    return provider.call(request)

Illustrative design sketch. Discovery without schema agreement is a lookup, not a broker contract. This example is a teaching aid, not implementation evidence or a conformance claim.

Detection & matching

The frozen rule that retrieves this record, the canonical source exemplar, and the control that should stay unmatched.

Join point: service_discovery_invocation
Source locator: Sarkar and Sarkar
Lexical cue: (?i)\b(?:broker|provider[_-]?registry|tool[_-]?registry|service[_-]?registry)\bFrozen expression, v0.1.0. A match is a retrieval cue, not a confirmed implementation.
Aliases: None
Canonical exemplar: mastra-ai/mastrapackages/core/src/events/unix-socket-pubsub.ts:325Support: packages/core/src/events/unix-socket-pubsub-codec.test.ts:62
Negative control: A local factory returning implementations is only a registry cue.

Scope-anchored review. pohe-agent analyze <repo> --pattern C04 anchors the cue to its enclosing declaration and checks a separate operational signature for all four pointcut dimensions. Missing roles and negative-control risks remain visible; a structural match is not E2/E3. Calibration report ↗

Repository files

Up to five public files retrieved by the frozen cue and pinned to the audited commit. A match is a place to inspect, not a confirmed implementation.

01mastra-ai/mastrapackages/core/src/events/unix-socket-pubsub.ts:325CANONICAL SOURCE 02aaif-goose/goosecrates/goose/src/agents/provider_manager.rs:10RETRIEVAL CUE 03affaan-m/ECCsrc/llm/__init__.py:18RETRIEVAL CUE 04agno-agi/agnolibs/agno/agno/os/app.py:449RETRIEVAL CUE 05bytedance/deer-flowbackend/packages/harness/deerflow/community/aio_sandbox/aio_sandbox.py:97RETRIEVAL CUE

Evidence & provenance

Each layer answers a different question. Do not substitute retrieval for review.

Source-located exemplar

A concrete source anchor is available for this proposed record. It is one exemplar, not evidence that all repositories—or every contract field—conform.

Review boundary: this candidate and its specification come from an AI-assisted study. Independent human validation remains open.

ANY-EVIDENCE FAMILY COVERAGE22/36

61.1% of repository families in the frozen panel have at least one current cue, historical cue, or canonical source layer. This is not confirmed prevalence.

Current lexical-cue repositories: 23 / 41

Canonical source anchormastra-ai/mastra 899383db98e0packages/core/src/events/unix-socket-pubsub.ts:325

Supporting surfacepackages/core/src/events/unix-socket-pubsub-codec.test.ts:62

Cross-process broker discovery and forwarding.

Exploratory retrieval cue Regex / v0.1.0

(?i)\b(?:broker|provider[_-]?registry|tool[_-]?registry|service[_-]?registry)\b

This expression is a discovery instrument only. A match is a retrieval cue—not a confirmed implementation, pointcut match, or contract proof.