warrant-mcp

An MCP (Model Context Protocol) server that provides formal reasoning and argument validation tools for AI agents. Built on established computational argumentation theories — Dung, Toulmin, Walton, Pollock, Prakken, and ASPIC+.

Features

• Dung's Abstract Argumentation Framework: Extensions (grounded, preferred, stable).
• Toulmin Model: Structured argument validation.
• Walton's Schemes: Critical questions for common reasoning patterns.
• Pollock's Defeasible Reasoning: Rebutting and undercutting defeaters.
• Prakken's Dialogue Protocol: Persuasion dialogue management.
• ASPIC+: Disagreement diagnosis.
• Gradual Semantics: Argument scoring (h-Categorizer, Counting).

Installation

This project uses uv for dependency management.

# Clone the repository
git clone https://github.com/jayden-chmod/warrant-mcp.git
cd warrant-mcp

# Install dependencies
uv sync

Usage

Running the MCP Server

warrant-mcp can be run using uv run.

uv run warrant-mcp

Configure for Claude Desktop

Add this to your claude_desktop_config.json:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "warrant-mcp": {
      "command": "uv",
      "args": [
        "run",
        "--directory",
        "/absolute/path/to/warrant-mcp",
        "warrant-mcp"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Development

# Run tests
uv run pytest

Theoretical Background

Dung's Abstract Argumentation Framework (1995)

Models arguments and attacks as a directed graph. Semantics determine acceptable arguments:

• Grounded: Skeptical, unique extension.
• Preferred: Credulous, maximal admissible sets.
• Stable: Conflict-free sets that attack everything outside.

Toulmin's Argument Model (1958)

Structures arguments with Claim, Data, Warrant, Backing, Rebuttal, and Qualifier.

Walton's Argumentation Schemes (1996)

Presumptive reasoning templates with critical questions (e.g., Expert Opinion, Consequences).

Pollock's Defeasible Reasoning (1987)

Rebutting (contradicts conclusion) vs Undercutting (breaks inference) defeaters.

Prakken's Dialogue Protocol (2006)

Formal dialogue with commitment stores and speech acts (claim, why, concede, retract).

ASPIC+ Disagreement Diagnosis

Classifies disagreements as Factual, Inferential, Preferential, or Goal Conflict.

License

MIT