A conformance checker that says "yes" when the real answer is "no" is worse than having no checker at all. That one worry shaped a small open-source side project I've been building for UCP (the Universal Commerce Protocol) — the open, agentic-commerce standard for letting AI agents discover products and run checkouts with merchants.
This is an unofficial, independent project. It's early, it doesn't cover everything yet, and it never claims a server is "certified." I'm sharing it mostly because the idea behind it — making each check prove it can fail — turned out to be more useful than I expected, and I'd genuinely like feedback (including "you got this wrong").
The worry: checks that can't fail
Most quick conformance checks boil down to "got a 200, looks fine." A check that never fails when the server is actually broken isn't a check — it's decoration, and it's dangerous because it hands you false confidence.
So I tried to hold the tool to one rule:
