LLMFeed Signature & Certification — Extended Specification (V2)

HIGH

📅 Created: 6/12/2025

👥 Audience: llm, developer, business-owner

⚡ Capabilities:signatureverificationcertificationfeed-generationtrust-validation

🤖 LLMFeed:/.well-known/mcp.llmfeed.json

🔐 LLMFeed Signature & Certification — Extended Specification (V2)

This document defines how .llmfeed.json feeds are signed, verified, and certified using asymmetric cryptography and trust blocks.

🚀 Key Innovation: LLMFeed signatures protect both data integrity and semantic intention integrity — ensuring LLMs experience feeds exactly as authors intended.

✅ Summary

Concept	Description
`trust` block	Declares what is signed and by whom
`signature`	Contains the cryptographic proof
`certification`	Optional third-party endorsement
`signed_blocks`	List of blocks covered — order preserved
Semantic Integrity	Key order preservation for LLM behavior protection
Delegated Signing	LLMCA services for friction-free adoption

🧠 LLM-Specific Canonicalization (Core Innovation)

Why LLMFeed canonicalization is revolutionary

Unlike traditional JSON canonicalization (which sorts keys for data integrity), LLMFeed canonicalization preserves key order to protect semantic intention.

The Problem: LLMs Process Order Semantically

json

// Version A: Author's intended experience
{
  "priority": "high",        ← LLM processes this first, sets context
  "task": "delete files",
  "safety_check": "required" ← Safety becomes secondary consideration
}

// Version B: Reordered (same data, different LLM behavior)
{
  "safety_check": "required", ← LLM focuses on safety first
  "task": "delete files",     ← Task processed with safety context
  "priority": "high"
}

Same JSON data → Different LLM interpretation → Different user outcomes

The LLMFeed Solution: Semantic Intention Integrity

Official LLMFeed/MCP Canonicalization (https://llmca.org/mcp-canonical-json/v1):

python

# ✅ CORRECT: Preserves author's intended key order
def llmfeed_canonicalize(data):
    return json.dumps(
        data, 
        separators=(',', ':'), 
        ensure_ascii=False
    ).encode('utf-8')

# ❌ WRONG: Traditional crypto approach (allows semantic manipulation)
def traditional_canonicalize(data):
    return json.dumps(
        data, 
        separators=(',', ':'), 
        sort_keys=True,  # ← This breaks LLM semantic integrity
        ensure_ascii=False
    ).encode('utf-8')

Security Model Evolution

Approach	Protects	Allows	Use Case
Traditional Crypto	Data integrity	Key reordering	Generic data verification
LLMFeed Crypto	Data + Semantic integrity	Nothing that changes LLM behavior	Agentic systems

LLMFeed signatures protect:

✅ Data integrity (standard cryptographic guarantee)
✅ Semantic intention integrity (LLMFeed innovation)
✅ Author's intended LLM behavior patterns
✅ User experience as designed

Any reordering invalidates the signature, preventing:

🚫 Manipulation of LLM attention/focus patterns
🚫 Semantic attacks through key reordering
🚫 Degradation of author's intended user experience
🚫 Post-signature behavior modification

🧱 Trust Block Structure

The trust block contains all signature parameters and is itself signed to prevent tampering:

json

"trust": {
  "signed_blocks": ["metadata", "capabilities", "trust"],
  "algorithm": "ed25519",
  "canonicalization": "https://llmca.org/mcp-canonical-json/v1",
  "public_key_hint": "https://example.org/.well-known/public.pem",
  "created_at": "2025-06-12T15:00:00Z"
}

Field Definitions

signed_blocks: Array of top-level blocks covered by signature (order preserved)
algorithm: Cryptographic algorithm (recommended: ed25519)
canonicalization: URL identifier for canonicalization method (not an endpoint!)
public_key_hint: URL where verification public key can be found
created_at: ISO 8601 timestamp of signature creation

Critical Design Principle

All signature parameters are in trust (signed), not signature (unsigned). This prevents attackers from changing verification parameters without invalidating the signature.

🧾 Signature Block Structure

The signature block is minimalist by design:

json

"signature": {
  "value": "base64-encoded-ed25519-signature"
}

Why minimalist? All parameters needed for verification are in the signed trust block, preventing parameter tampering attacks.

Signature Generation Process

python

def sign_llmfeed(feed_data, private_key, signed_blocks):
    # 1. Extract only signed blocks, preserving order
    partial = {block: feed_data[block] for block in signed_blocks if block in feed_data}
    
    # 2. Apply LLMFeed canonicalization (NO sort_keys!)
    payload_bytes = json.dumps(
        partial, 
        separators=(',', ':'), 
        ensure_ascii=False
    ).encode('utf-8')
    
    # 3. Sign with Ed25519
    signature_bytes = private_key.sign(payload_bytes)
    
    # 4. Encode signature
    return base64.b64encode(signature_bytes).decode('utf-8')

🪪 Certification: Building the Agentic Trust Network

Why Certification Transforms the Ecosystem

Signatures prove authenticity + integrity. Certifications prove trustworthiness.

While anyone can sign a feed, certification establishes reputation in the agentic economy:

Author Signs → "This content is mine AND unchanged since signing"
Certifier Signs → "This content/author is trustworthy" 
Agent Decides → "I can act on this with confidence"

Real-World Certification Impact

Scenario	Author	Certifier	Agent Benefit
Enterprise API	Stripe	LLMCA.org	Agents trust payment processing
Medical Information	Hospital	Medical Board	Agents verify health data accuracy
Financial Data	Bank	Regulatory Authority	Agents confirm financial compliance
Code Repository	Developer	GitHub Verified	Agents trust code execution
News Content	Journalist	News Organization	Agents verify information quality

🔗 Certification Models & Trust Chains

Model 1: Content Certification (Same signed_blocks)

json

"certification": {
  "certifier": "https://llmca.org",
  "targets": ["metadata", "capabilities", "trust"],  // Same as signed_blocks
  "model": "content_vouching",
  "verification_details": {
    "content_reviewed": true,
    "compliance_checked": ["gdpr", "ccpa"],
    "security_audited": true
  },
  "value": "base64-certifier-signature-of-same-payload",
  "issued_at": "2025-06-12T15:00:00Z",
  "expires_at": "2026-06-12T15:00:00Z"
}

Technical: Certifier signs the exact same canonical payload as the author
Meaning: "We independently vouch for this specific content"
Use Case: Content mirroring, archive validation, compliance attestation

Model 2: Signature Certification (Recommended)

json

"certification": {
  "certifier": "https://llmca.org",
  "targets": ["signature"],  // Certifies the signature hash
  "model": "identity_validation",
  "identity_verified": "stripe.com",
  "verification_level": "enterprise",
  "verification_details": {
    "domain_control": "verified",
    "business_registration": "verified", 
    "key_management": "audited"
  },
  "signature_hash": "sha256-of-signature-value",
  "value": "base64-certifier-signature-of-signature-hash",
  "issued_at": "2025-06-12T15:00:00Z",
  "expires_at": "2026-06-12T15:00:00Z"
}

Technical: Certifier signs the SHA-256 hash of the author's signature
Meaning: "We verify the identity of the signer AND validate their signature process"
Use Case: Identity validation, preferred model for scalable trust

Model 3: Delegated Certification (Ecosystem Scale)

json

"certification": {
  "certifier": "https://github.com",
  "delegates_to": "https://llmca.org",
  "targets": ["signature"],
  "verification_method": "github_verified_organization",
  "delegation_policy": "technical_compliance_only",
  "value": "base64-delegated-certification",
  "chain_depth": 2,
  "issued_at": "2025-06-12T15:00:00Z",
  "expires_at": "2026-06-12T15:00:00Z"
}

Why Signature Certification is Preferred

Aspect	Content Certification	Signature Certification
Certifier Responsibility	❌ Must validate all content semantics	✅ Focus on identity & process validation
Content Updates	❌ Re-certification required	✅ Certification survives content updates
Scalability	❌ Limited by content review capacity	✅ Scales with identity verification
Separation of Concerns	❌ Mixed content & identity validation	✅ Authors own content, Certifiers validate identity

🔄 Certification Lifecycle

Phase 1: Certification Request

typescript

// Author requests certification
POST https://llmca.org/api/certify
{
  "feed_url": "https://stripe.com/.well-known/mcp.llmfeed.json",
  "identity_proofs": {
    "domain_control": "dns_txt_record",
    "business_verification": "duns_number",
    "key_ownership": "challenge_response"
  },
  "certification_type": "signature_certification"
}

Phase 2: Verification Process

Identity Verification:

DNS control validation
Business registration verification
Domain ownership confirmation
Key management audit

Technical Validation:

Feed structure compliance
Signature correctness
Canonicalization adherence
Security best practices

Reputation Assessment:

Historical behavior analysis
Community standing review
Compliance track record

Phase 3: Certification Issuance

json

"certification": {
  "certifier": "https://llmca.org",
  "cert_id": "cert_stripe_2025_enterprise_001",
  "verification_details": {
    "identity_verified": "stripe.com",
    "verification_date": "2025-06-12T15:00:00Z",
    "verification_methods": ["dns_control", "business_registration", "duns_verification"],
    "compliance_level": "enterprise",
    "security_audit": "passed",
    "reputation_score": 0.98
  },
  "targets": ["signature"],
  "signature_hash": "sha256-abc123...",
  "value": "base64-certification-signature",
  "issued_at": "2025-06-12T15:00:00Z",
  "expires_at": "2026-06-12T15:00:00Z",
  "renewable": true
}

Phase 4: Monitoring & Renewal

Continuous monitoring of certified feeds for policy compliance
Automatic renewal for organizations maintaining compliance
Immediate revocation for policy violations or security breaches
Appeals process for disputed revocations

🚨 Revocation & Trust Management

Revocation Mechanisms

1. Certificate Revocation List (CRL)

https://llmca.org/.well-known/revoked-certifications.json

2. Online Certificate Status Protocol (OCSP)

https://llmca.org/api/ocsp/{cert_id}
→ {"status": "valid|revoked|expired", "timestamp": "..."}

3. Feed-Level Revocation Notification

json

"certification": {
  "status": "revoked",
  "revoked_at": "2025-06-15T10:00:00Z",
  "reason": "policy_violation",
  "details": "Automated systems detected content policy violation"
}

Agent Verification Workflow

python

def verify_certification(feed):
    cert = feed.get('certification')
    if not cert:
        return {"status": "uncertified", "trust_level": "basic"}
    
    # 1. Check expiration
    if datetime.now() > cert['expires_at']:
        return {"status": "expired", "trust_level": "degraded"}
    
    # 2. Check revocation (with caching)
    revocation_status = check_revocation_with_cache(cert['cert_id'])
    if revocation_status == "revoked":
        return {"status": "revoked", "trust_level": "none"}
    
    # 3. Verify certifier signature
    if not verify_certifier_signature(cert):
        return {"status": "invalid_certification", "trust_level": "none"}
    
    # 4. Validate certification chain
    chain_valid = verify_certification_chain(cert['certifier'])
    if not chain_valid:
        return {"status": "untrusted_certifier", "trust_level": "degraded"}
    
    # 5. Compute trust score
    trust_score = compute_trust_score(cert)
    
    return {
        "status": "valid", 
        "trust_level": "certified",
        "trust_score": trust_score,
        "certifier": cert['certifier']
    }

🏛️ Certifier Ecosystem & Governance

Certified Certifiers Registry

Tier 1 - Root Certifiers (Infrastructure Trust)

LLMCA.org: Technical standards, protocol compliance
Domain Registrars: Domain ownership, DNS control
Government Agencies: Regulatory compliance, legal status

Tier 2 - Domain Specialists (Sector Trust)

Medical Boards: Healthcare information accuracy
Financial Regulators: Financial data compliance
Industry Associations: Sector-specific standards

Tier 3 - Platform Certifiers (Community Trust)

GitHub: Developer identity, code repository trust
App Stores: Mobile application verification
Corporate Systems: Internal employee/service verification

Certifier Policy Feed

Each certifier MUST expose a machine-readable policy at:

/.well-known/certifier-policy.llmfeed.json

Complete Policy Example:

json

{
  "feed_type": "certifier-policy",
  "metadata": {
    "title": "LLMCA Certification Authority Policy",
    "description": "Official certification policy for LLMFeed feeds",
    "version": "2.1.0",
    "last_updated": "2025-06-12T15:00:00Z"
  },
  "certifier": "https://llmca.org",
  "certification_policy": {
    "validity_period": {
      "days": 365,
      "max_renewals": 10,
      "renewal_window_days": 30
    },
    "accepted_algorithms": ["ed25519"],
    "canonicalization_methods": ["https://llmca.org/mcp-canonical-json/v1"],
    "verification_requirements": {
      "identity": {
        "required_methods": ["domain_control", "business_registration"],
        "optional_methods": ["duns_verification", "manual_review"],
        "minimum_confidence_score": 0.85
      },
      "content": {
        "must_include_blocks": ["metadata", "trust"],
        "prohibited_content": ["malware", "spam", "illegal_content"],
        "compliance_frameworks": ["gdpr", "ccpa", "iso27001"]
      },
      "technical": {
        "minimum_key_strength": "ed25519-256",
        "signature_freshness_max_days": 90,
        "must_be_signed_by": "verified_feed_owner"
      }
    },
    "monitoring": {
      "continuous_validation": true,
      "violation_response_time_hours": 24,
      "automated_revocation": true,
      "appeal_process_url": "https://llmca.org/appeals"
    }
  },
  "pricing": {
    "individual": {"cost": "free", "limits": "5 feeds/month"},
    "organization": {"cost": "$100/year", "limits": "unlimited"},
    "enterprise": {"cost": "custom", "sla": "99.9% uptime"}
  },
  "contact": {
    "support": "support@llmca.org",
    "appeals": "appeals@llmca.org",
    "security": "security@llmca.org"
  },
  "trust": {
    "signed_blocks": ["certifier-policy", "trust"],
    "algorithm": "ed25519",
    "canonicalization": "https://llmca.org/mcp-canonical-json/v1",
    "public_key_hint": "https://llmca.org/.well-known/public.pem",
    "created_at": "2025-06-12T15:00:00Z"
  },
  "signature": {
    "value": "base64-encoded-signature"
  }
}

🎯 Business Value & Economic Impact

Value for Feed Authors

Increased Agent Adoption

Certified feeds receive higher trust scores from agents
Premium placement in agent marketplace discovery
Reduced liability through certifier risk sharing

Market Differentiation

"Certified by LLMCA" badge for marketing
Competitive advantage in agentic economy
Professional credibility establishment

Operational Benefits

Simplified compliance (certifier validates)
Automated trust network participation
Reduced manual verification requests

Value for AI Agents

Risk Reduction

Confident decision-making with verified sources
Reduced false positive/negative rates
Liability protection through certification chain

Regulatory Compliance

Meet industry standards through certified sources
Automated compliance reporting
Audit trail for decisions

User Experience

Provide users with verifiable information sources
Transparent trust indicators
Reduced "hallucination" risk through verified data

Value for Certifiers

Revenue Opportunities

Certification as a Service (CaaS) business model
Tiered pricing for different trust levels
Premium services for enterprise clients

Market Position

Become trusted authority in specific domains
Network effects: more certifications = more value
Platform lock-in through trust relationships

Ecosystem Influence

Shape standards in emerging agentic economy
Build valuable intellectual property
Create barrier to entry for competitors

🧠 Agent Behavior Guidelines

Trust Level Decision Matrix

Signature Status	Certification Status	Agent Behavior	Trust Level
✅ Valid	✅ Valid Certification	Full trust, autonomous action allowed	High
✅ Valid	⚠️ Expired Certification	Accept with warning, limited autonomy	Medium
✅ Valid	❌ Revoked Certification	Reject or heavy scrutiny required	Low
✅ Valid	➖ No Certification	Accept with caution, user confirmation	Basic
❌ Invalid	➖ Any	Reject completely	None
❌ Missing	➖ Any	Warn user, degrade trust significantly	Minimal

Implementation Guidelines

python

def compute_agent_trust_score(feed):
    base_score = 0.0
    
    # Signature validation (required)
    if verify_signature(feed):
        base_score += 0.5
    else:
        return 0.0  # Invalid signature = zero trust
    
    # Certification validation (optional)
    cert_result = verify_certification(feed)
    if cert_result["status"] == "valid":
        base_score += 0.4
        # Bonus for high-reputation certifiers
        if cert_result["certifier"] in TIER_1_CERTIFIERS:
            base_score += 0.1
    
    # Freshness bonus
    signature_age_days = get_signature_age_days(feed)
    if signature_age_days < 30:
        base_score += 0.05
    elif signature_age_days > 365:
        base_score -= 0.1
    
    # Canonical structure compliance
    if verify_canonical_structure(feed):
        base_score += 0.05
    
    return min(1.0, max(0.0, base_score))

🔧 Implementation Best Practices

Multi-Certification Scenarios

json

"certifications": [
  {
    "certifier": "https://llmca.org",
    "scope": "technical_compliance",
    "targets": ["signature"],
    "trust_level": "infrastructure"
  },
  {
    "certifier": "https://medical-board.org", 
    "scope": "medical_accuracy",
    "targets": ["metadata", "content"],
    "trust_level": "domain_expert"
  },
  {
    "certifier": "https://enterprise-corp.com",
    "scope": "internal_approval", 
    "targets": ["signature"],
    "trust_level": "organizational"
  }
]

Certification Inheritance

json

"certification": {
  "inherited_from": "https://parent-org.com/.well-known/mcp.llmfeed.json",
  "inheritance_policy": "technical_certification_only",
  "inheritance_depth": 1,
  "additional_certifications": [
    {
      "certifier": "https://domain-specialist.org",
      "scope": "content_specific"
    }
  ]
}

Performance Optimization

Certificate Caching Strategy:

python

# Cache certifier public keys and policies
CERTIFIER_CACHE = {
    "https://llmca.org": {
        "public_key": "...",
        "policy": {...},
        "cached_at": "2025-06-12T15:00:00Z",
        "ttl": 86400  # 24 hours
    }
}

# Batch verification for multiple feeds
def batch_verify_certifications(feeds):
    # Group by certifier for efficient verification
    # Validate revocation lists once per certifier
    # Return aggregate trust scores

Trust Score Caching:

python

# Cache computed trust scores with appropriate TTL
TRUST_CACHE = {
    "feed_hash": {
        "score": 0.95,
        "computed_at": "2025-06-12T15:00:00Z",
        "ttl": 3600  # 1 hour for high-trust feeds
    }
}

✅ Complete Reference Implementation

Minimal Valid Signed Feed

json

{
  "feed_type": "mcp",
  "metadata": {
    "title": "Example Service",
    "description": "Demonstration of LLMFeed signatures"
  },
  "capabilities": [
    {
      "path": "/api/example",
      "method": "GET",
      "description": "Example capability"
    }
  ],
  "trust": {
    "signed_blocks": ["metadata", "capabilities", "trust"],
    "algorithm": "ed25519",
    "canonicalization": "https://llmca.org/mcp-canonical-json/v1",
    "public_key_hint": "https://example.com/.well-known/public.pem",
    "created_at": "2025-06-12T15:00:00Z"
  },
  "signature": {
    "value": "base64-encoded-ed25519-signature"
  }
}

Enterprise Certified Feed

json

{
  "feed_type": "mcp",
  "metadata": {
    "title": "Stripe Payment API",
    "description": "Production payment processing capabilities",
    "version": "2024.1",
    "author": "Stripe, Inc."
  },
  "capabilities": [
    {
      "path": "/v1/charges",
      "method": "POST", 
      "description": "Create payment charge",
      "security_level": "enterprise"
    }
  ],
  "trust": {
    "signed_blocks": ["metadata", "capabilities", "trust"],
    "algorithm": "ed25519",
    "canonicalization": "https://llmca.org/mcp-canonical-json/v1",
    "public_key_hint": "https://stripe.com/.well-known/public.pem",
    "created_at": "2025-06-12T15:00:00Z"
  },
  "signature": {
    "value": "stripe-signature-base64"
  },
  "certification": {
    "certifier": "https://llmca.org",
    "cert_id": "cert_stripe_2025_enterprise_001",
    "targets": ["signature"],
    "model": "identity_validation",
    "identity_verified": "stripe.com",
    "verification_level": "enterprise",
    "verification_details": {
      "domain_control": "verified_2025-06-01",
      "business_registration": "verified_delaware_corp",
      "security_audit": "passed_2025-05-15",
      "compliance": ["pci_dss", "gdpr", "ccpa"]
    },
    "signature_hash": "sha256-stripe-signature-hash",
    "value": "llmca-certification-signature-base64",
    "issued_at": "2025-06-12T15:00:00Z",
    "expires_at": "2026-06-12T15:00:00Z"
  }
}

🚀 Future Evolution & Ecosystem Vision

Decentralized Trust Networks

Long-term Vision: Evolution from centralized certification authorities to decentralized trust networks:

json

"trust_network": {
  "network_id": "web3_agentic_trust",
  "consensus_model": "proof_of_reputation",
  "validators": [
    "https://llmca.org",
    "https://github.com", 
    "https://mozilla.org"
  ],
  "trust_score": 0.94,
  "network_governance": "dao_based",
  "reputation_algorithm": "page_rank_variant"
}

Key Features:

Communities establish their own certification criteria
Agents choose preferred trust networks
Cross-certification creates resilient trust webs
Reputation becomes algorithmic and measurable
Reduced single points of failure

Emerging Standards Integration

W3C DID integration for decentralized identity
Blockchain anchoring for immutable audit trails
Zero-knowledge proofs for privacy-preserving verification
AI-powered reputation scoring based on behavior patterns

📝 Note: LLMCA Delegated Signing Services

LLMCA.org provides delegated signing services to eliminate friction while maintaining security and transparency. The /sign service enables organizations to deploy signed feeds without managing cryptographic infrastructure.

Service Philosophy

"User must see what they sign" - Complete transparency with no black-box operations:

Prepare: User uploads feed, system adds trust block with proper parameters
Review: User sees complete prepared feed before signing
Sign: System signs only the explicitly approved content
Verify: Immediate signature validation with downloadable result

Technical Implementation

typescript

// Simplified workflow
const workflow = {
  prepare: async (feed, identity_hint) => {
    // Inject trust block with LLMCA key hint
    return prepareDelegatedFeed(feed, identity_hint)
  },
  
  sign: async (prepared_feed, key_type) => {
    // key_type: 'editor' | 'authority' | 'certifier'
    return signWithLLMCAKey(prepared_feed, key_type)
  },
  
  verify: async (signed_feed) => {
    // Immediate validation of generated signature
    return verifySignature(signed_feed)
  }
}

Benefits for Ecosystem Adoption

For Authors:

✅ No key management complexity
✅ Immediate signing capability
✅ Full transparency and auditability
✅ Professional-grade infrastructure

For Agents:

✅ Consistent, reliable signature format
✅ Known, trusted key infrastructure
✅ Reduced verification complexity

For Ecosystem:

✅ Accelerated adoption through reduced friction
✅ Consistent implementation of best practices
✅ Bridge to eventual self-hosted signing

For detailed implementation, see LLMCA's /sign API documentation, useSignFeed React hooks, and prepareDelegatedFeed utilities.

🔐 Key Management Best Practices

Hosting Public Keys

Recommended path for self-hosted keys:

https://yoursite.org/.well-known/public.pem

Standard Ed25519 PEM format:

-----BEGIN PUBLIC KEY-----
MCowBQYDK2VwAyEA...
-----END PUBLIC KEY-----

Key Rotation Strategy

json

"trust": {
  "public_key_hint": "https://example.com/.well-known/public-2025.pem",
  "key_rotation_policy": {
    "rotation_frequency": "annual",
    "previous_key": "https://example.com/.well-known/public-2024.pem",
    "overlap_period_days": 90
  }
}

🧩 Related Specifications

LLMFeed Core - Base LLMFeed specification
MCP Canonical JSON v1 - Official canonicalization algorithm
Agent Behavior - Agent behavior specifications
Verification Tools - Online signature verification
MCP Feed Type - MCP-specific feed structure

📚 Implementation Resources

Official Tools

sign_feed.py - Reference signing implementation (Available now)
verify_signature.py - Reference verification implementation (Available now)
LLMCA /sign service - Delegated signing for production use (Beta)
Online verification - https://llmca.org/verify (Available now)

Libraries & SDKs

Reference Python implementation - Available in /scripts directory
JavaScript/TypeScript SDK - In development, Q2 2025
Production Python library - Planned Q3 2025
Additional language bindings - Community contributions welcome

Community & Documentation

GitHub: https://github.com/wellknownmcp/llmfeed-spec (Active)
Specification docs: https://wellknownmcp.org/spec (Live)
LLMCA API docs: https://docs.llmca.org (Beta)
Community forum - Coming soon

Specification Status: Living Document
Last Updated: 2025-06-12T15:00:00Z
Version: V2.1
Maintained by: LLMCA.org & LLMFeed Community

⚡

Ready to Implement? Get AI-Powered Guidance

Reading docs manually takes time. Your AI can digest the complete LLMFeed specification and provide implementation guidance tailored to your needs.

🎯

Quick Start

Essential concepts for immediate implementation

~22K tokens • 30s analysis • Core concepts

📚

Complete Mastery

Full specification with examples and edge cases

~140K tokens • 2min analysis • Everything

💡 Works with Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini⚡ Instant implementation guidance🎯 Tailored to your specific needs