cs.CRAug 13, 2026

InterSAGE: The Secure and Verifiable Interoperability Protocol for An Internet of Agents

Authors: Zhenhua Zou, Sheng Guo, Qiuyang Zhan, Lepeng Zhao, Shuo Li, Zhuotao Liu

Organizations: A Paper from the DeepKernel Lab

Abstract

The emerging Internet of Agents enables LLM-powered agents to discover peers, invoke tools, and delegate tasks across organizational boundaries. Existing protocols increasingly define how agents exchange messages, but not how an agent proves its identity, authorization, advertised capabilities, or accountability after delegation. We present InterSAGE, a trust-native protocol suite that supplies this missing security substrate alongside, rather than in place of, communication protocols. InterSAGE comprises four layers: Persistent Identity, Discovery, Trust Negotiation, and Accountability. Its four core primitives are: (1) Agent Identity Cards that bind developer, code package, operator, and deployment context; (2) capability-aware discovery using DID-bound Verifiable Credential manifests; (3) trust negotiation combining monotonic capability attenuation with two-tier access control; and (4) kernel-mediated cryptographic audit trails that bind usage, delegation, and execution traces to agent identity without a consensus ledger. InterSAGE is designed to complement MCP, A2A, ANP, and AG-UI, allowing communication protocols to evolve independently while keeping trust semantics explicit, portable, and verifiable. We compare InterSAGE with more than 50 efforts spanning agent protocols, decentralized identity, OAuth/OIDC extensions, zero-trust governance, delegation, and audit architectures. We show that no prior architecture jointly enforces persistent identity, capability-aware discovery, trust negotiation, and accountability as a unified four-layer trust substrate for secure agent interoperability.

Explore similar work

CardsList
Jun 30, 2026cs.MA

Governance Gaps in Agent Interoperability Protocols: What MCP, A2A, and ACP Cannot Express

Agent interoperability protocols (MCP, A2A, ACP, ANP, and ERC-8004) have rapidly matured to enable identity, capability discovery, tool access, and message exchange between autonomous agents. However, as enterprises deploy heterogeneous agent fleets that must make collective decisions under governance constraints, a question arises: can these protocols support governed agent communities, or only task-oriented coordination? We present a systematic gap analysis applying a six-dimension governance requirements taxonomy (membership, deliberation, voting, dissent preservation, human escalation, and audit/replay) derived from organizational theory, multi-agent systems literature, and enterprise governance standards. We analyze each protocol's specification against this taxonomy, classifying capabilities as Supported, Partial, or Absent. The resulting gap matrix reveals that voting and dissent preservation are universally absent across all five protocols, deliberation is absent or at most partial, and no protocol encodes the full set of primitives required for governed agent communities. We distinguish extensible gaps (addressable through protocol extension mechanisms) from structural gaps (requiring a new architectural layer) and assess time-sensitivity based on observed protocol evolution velocity. The analysis establishes that agent community governance constitutes a missing architectural layer above current interoperability standards, not a missing feature within them.
Richard Kang, Yudho Diponegoro
ProtocolModel Context ProtocolTaxonomyVelocity
AskPDF
Jan 21, 2026cs.MA

Agent Identity URI Scheme: Topology-Independent Naming and Capability-Based Discovery for Multi-Agent Systems

Multi-agent systems face a fundamental architectural flaw: agent identity is bound to network location. When agents migrate between providers, scale across instances, or federate across organizations, URI-based identity schemes break references, fragment audit trails, and require centralized coordination. We propose the agent:// URI scheme, which decouples identity from topology through three orthogonal components: a trust root establishing organizational authority, a hierarchical capability path enabling semantic discovery, and a sortable unique identifier providing stable reference. The scheme enables capability-based discovery through DHT key derivation, where queries return agents by what they do rather than where they are. Trust-root scoping prevents cross-organization pollution while permitting federation when desired. Cryptographic attestation via PASETO tokens binds capability claims to agent identity, enabling verification without real-time contact with the issuing authority. We evaluate the scheme across four dimensions: capability expressiveness (100% coverage on 369 production tools with zero collision), discovery precision (F1=1.0 across 10,000 agents), identity stability (formal proofs of migration invariance), and performance (all operations under 5 microseconds). The agent:// URI scheme provides a formally-specified, practically-evaluated foundation for decentralized agent identity and capability-based discovery.
Roland R. Rodriguez
Decentralized Multi-Agent SystemTopology
AskPDF
Jun 2, 2026cs.MA

OpenAgenet / OAN Yellow Paper: Technical Architecture for Trust-Governed Resource Identity and Discovery

This yellow paper describes the technical architecture of OpenAgenet / OAN. OAN is a protocol-neutral trust layer for open Agent interconnection and discoverable AI resource products. It specifies the role architecture, \texttt{did:oan} identity objects, registration workflow, governance-backed Root lifecycle enforcement, Root-verified package model, authorization-aware Discovery, Root-issued infrastructure authorization VCs, signed trusted invocation, verification requirements, state transitions, security properties, implementation boundaries, and deployment considerations. The design is intended to support heterogeneous Agent frameworks and interaction protocols, including MCP, A2A, ANP-like systems, domain-specific Agent protocols, Skills, MCP Servers, and Tool/API resources. OAN does not define the entire business conversation among Agents or the native protocol of every resource; it defines how resource identities become admissible, discoverable, verifiable, and safe to approach before protocol-specific interaction begins.
Jinliang Xu
Protocol
AskPDF