Unverified50% confidenceFactExact time
The Agent boundary assessment covers seven categories: goal hijacking, tool misuse, identity and permissions, memory and context, MCP tool poisoning, excessive agency, and framework mapping.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Medium-term (~90 days)
Relevance
10/14/2026
First Seen
Valid until: 1/12/2027
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedAgentPaySec categorizes test dimensions into six directions: authorization control, prompt injection, payment integrity, transaction tampering, tool abuse, and business logic vulnerabilities.74% similarUnverifiedagent-ops-check summarizes agent operational risks into five directions: Crossover (personal data), Actions (site operations), Governance/Labs (governance and overhead), ADSF (document-hidden instructions), and STE (unclear instruction phrasing).71% similarUnverifiedAgent context can be broken down into seven components: instructions/system prompt, long-term memory, state/short-term history, retrieved information (RAG), prompts/input, available tools, and structured output.71% similarUnverifiedAgent classification is the division of different roles: some are specifically responsible for planning, some specifically write code, and some only do code review or testing, and each can be bound to different models, rules, and tool permissions.69% similarUnverifiedFor AI agents or MCP servers, additional testing is required for specialized checks such as goal hijacking, tool poisoning, and the Confused Deputy problem.68% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/1030554API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/1030554MCP
get_claim(id=1030554)