Aerospace / civil aviation Draft extension · reviewed 12 October 2026
A vendor-side aviation ML disclosure, an artifact-bound AI-assisted maintenance review, and dataset provenance checks. Each fits the existing Protocol Suite. None is an airworthiness approval, a maintenance release, or a regulatory filing.
Five aerospace repositories are public drafts. The aviation MCP tools remain in review; the public MCP package does not yet include them.
One Suite extension, four linked assets
Two cards define what the vendor discloses and what a human reviewed. A dataset tool checks concrete engineering properties. A crosswalk identifies the public sources behind the questions.
Vendor disclosure · draft spec
Identifies the system, intended use, proposed EASA AI level, target design-assurance level, operational conditions, learning process, dataset references, and human role. Each declared operating condition can point to its own evidence.
The card records a vendor assertion. It does not assign a DAL or prove that evidence is sufficient.
Per-artifact review · draft spec
Binds an AI-assisted maintenance finding to the model version, inspected artifact hash, evidence references, human decision, and review signature. It can record an override and the reviewer’s authority reference.
A signed review is not a certificate of release to service or proof of staff privileges.
Engineering check · public draft
The Rust tool hashes dataset files and a manifest, checks train, validation, and test split overlap, and reports coverage gaps against declared operating conditions. It can sign its reports with the existing hash-attestation library.
Inspect the source and test fixtures
A hash proves byte identity, not collection rights, labeling quality, or real-world coverage.
Source map · draft reference
Links proposed card fields to EASA proposal topics, the FAA roadmap, public standard identifiers, NIST AI RMF categories, and separate maintenance-release rules. Every row states its applicability and limit.
Explore the crosswalk · Source
Licensed standard objectives have not been verified or reproduced; this is not a conformity matrix.
Composition
The aviation validators and inspectors are proposed for mcp-kinetic-gain, alongside the existing Suite tools. The existing AI Incident Card now has an optional aviation profile. A fleet summary Action checks card structure in pull requests. No second MCP server or separate aviation incident format is proposed.
Primary sources · status matters
These references point to objectives and boundaries. The card schemas are a proposed disclosure format, not a regulator-endorsed method.
Examples use synthetic, publicly shareable material. Do not place aircraft technical data, restricted maintenance records, personal data, or export-controlled information in a public card. Standards text remains under its publisher’s terms.