Dan Trapp

Open-source infrastructure / Developer infrastructure

Open Source Infrastructure

OSS work around Claude Code workflow discipline, MCP visibility, public API access, living documentation, and Infisical Agent Vault diagnostics.

A set of developer-infrastructure projects focused on repeatable LLM-based development workflows, MCP observability, no-key public API access, living documentation, and agent-secret diagnostics.

Status

Live

Timeline

Ongoing OSS and developer-infrastructure work

Domain

Developer infrastructure

Why

Open-source infrastructure

Developer workflow

Spec → Build → PR → Review

Live

Mode

OSS

Focus

AI dev

Goal

Repeatable

Claude Code workflow structure, MCP visibility, public API tools, and Agent Vault diagnostics.

Stack

Languages, services, data sources, and operating pieces behind the build.

Claude CodeTypeScriptNode.jsMCPGoGitHub Actions

Code Proof

What The Build Actually Contains

Projects

5 live

Workflow

1.9k LOC

Wiretap

3k LOC

Public APIs

2.8k LOC

PostHog

Reader

Workflow preview

Spec To PR

01

CLAUDE.md

Repo rules and build conventions

02

AGENTS.md

Agent autonomy boundaries

03

SPEC_TEMPLATE.md

Scope before code

04

PR_TEMPLATE.md

Explain the change

05

WORKFLOW.md

Repeatable loop

06

examples/

Real project starting points

System shape

Developer workflow

Spec → Build → PR → Review

Live

Mode

OSS

Focus

AI dev

Goal

Repeatable

Claude Code workflow structure, MCP visibility, public API tools, and Agent Vault diagnostics.

Implementation

Code Behind The Surface

Claude workflow guardrail

md

The core move behind the product surface.

Idea or ticket
  -> SPEC_TEMPLATE.md
  -> Claude Code builds with CLAUDE.md loaded
  -> PR_TEMPLATE.md
  -> Review and real test
  -> Merge

Product Model

ts

The useful answer has to be modeled before the UI can make it obvious.

type ProductSurface = {
  input: "Developer infrastructure";
  signal: "What helps fast-moving AI builders move from vibes to a workflow they can repeat and";
  proof: string[];
};

const surface: ProductSurface = {
  input: "Developer infrastructure",
  signal: "Claude Code workflow structure, MCP visibility, public API tools, and Agent Vault di",
  proof: [
  "Claude Code workflow system",
  "MCP Wiretap inspection",
  "MCP Public APIs server",
  "PostHog Handbook Library"
],
};

Hard Part

ts

Every build has a constraint: data quality, workflow shape, trust, speed, or operational risk.

const constraint = {
  project: "Open Source Infrastructure",
  status: "Live",
  category: "Open-source infrastructure",
  hardPart: "The point is better AI-assisted building: inspectable, repeatable, and less chaotic....",
};

shipSurface(constraint);

Project Logic

Why This Exists

The useful part is the path: what was broken, what I built, and where the leverage showed up.

Mission

What helps fast-moving AI builders move from vibes to a workflow they can repeat and trust?

LLM-based development gets messy fast when there is no spec, no repo-level guidance, no review habit, and no line between what an agent can decide and what a human should own. The same pattern shows up in MCP and agent infrastructure: hidden behavior kills trust.

Build

What Had To Work

I built Claude Code Workflow as the anchor project, then grouped the rest of the OSS work around the same idea: MCP Wiretap for protocol inspection, MCP Public APIs for zero-key agent tools, PostHog Handbook Library for living documentation, and an Infisical Agent Vault PR for request-log inspection and diagnostics.

Why It Matters

Spec → Build → PR → Review

Makes AI and MCP development more inspectable, repeatable, and easier to trust.

Hard Parts

AI-assisted builds need rails

A lot of people are building with LLMs before they understand software workflow. Claude Code Workflow gives them a path: plan first, constrain the agent, review the work, test it for real.

Agent tools need inspection

MCP and agent-secret systems are powerful because they act on behalf of the user. That also means logs, diagnostics, and protocol visibility are not nice-to-have features; they are how trust is earned.

OSS has to be immediately usable

The projects are designed around low-friction starts: one command for Wiretap, one command for Public APIs, clear templates for Claude Code Workflow, and concrete CLI diagnostics for Agent Vault.

Decisions

Lead with Claude Code Workflow because it has the broadest potential audience and educational value.
List each OSS project individually instead of hiding them inside one infrastructure paragraph.
Describe the actual implementation surface: stdio proxying, SQLite logs, MCP tool registration, living rebuilds, CLI diagnostics, specs, and PR templates.
Keep links only for public work that is ready to be shown.

Proof

Live artifact with inspectable product surface, implementation details, and proof points.

Projects: 5 live

Workflow: 1.9k LOC

Wiretap: 3k LOC

Claude Code workflow system

MCP Wiretap inspection

MCP Public APIs server

Tell Me About Your Project

Bring Me The Bottleneck.
I’ll Build The Answer.

Tell me what people are trying to do, where the current path breaks, and what kind of useful answer should exist.

Market Gap

Demand exists, but the answer is missing.

Workflow Drag

The work is still too manual, slow, or scattered.

Product Wedge

A small surface could prove the larger opportunity.

Quick Note