Albertito AI MCP Server

Albert Tan Sin Hon

I study how institutions turn evidence into decisions, and how those decisions become answerable to the people affected by them. I am a PhD researcher at the University of Groningen, working on sustainability reporting, legal accountability and regulatory coordination in Asia. Alongside my scholarship, I develop practical research tools and teaching materials.

Website · Research profile · ORCID · Listen & Learn

Research Lab · Project whitepapers · For agents and builders · Work with me

The Human Question: an invitation to contribute

I am President and Editor-in-Chief of The Human Question: A Journal of Humanistic Inquiry, an open-access journal exploring what ideas, institutions and discoveries mean for human life.

Visit the journal · Author instructions · Approved house style · Editorial policies · Open-source website

The first issue is in preparation. There are no author fees. Research articles and scholarly review or critical essays require two independent external reports, normally under double-anonymous review. Submissions and reviewer enquiries: editor@thehumanquestionjournal.com.

Explore my connected work: the journal, book, learning materials, research tools and routes for collaboration.

Read and teach Insurance-Backed Offshore Liquidity

My open-access book, Insurance-Backed Offshore Liquidity: Financial Law, Trust Governance and Regulatory Visibility at the PRC–Hong Kong Interface, was published by University of Groningen Press on 6 November 2026. Read the free publisher edition, DOI 10.21827/6ac3948159a9e.

Explore the open learning companion · Eight seminar plans · Lecture and evidence games · Library packet · Connect an agent

The companion includes 32 explained questions, six fictional cases, a record-sorting game, citation exports and a local read-only MCP interface. The book retains CC BY-NC-ND 4.0; original companion teaching material is CC BY 4.0 and companion code is MIT. Rights and source boundaries. Share the book · Project discovery guide (text) · Sitemap (XML). The supplement is AI-assisted work commissioned by the author, not a publisher-reviewed edition. Legal cut-off: 1 August 2026.

Help an agent reach a verified outcome

Atlas Upstream 0.2.1 gives agents seven discoverable MCP tools for defining a mission, deciding from current evidence, recovering after interruption and exporting a verified result to Atlas Opsbook. It retains source authority, disagreements and unfinished actions across sessions.

Explore the recorded decisions · Download the source and installable wheel · Connect an agent · Verification record (Markdown)

Public evaluation alpha. 45 tests passed with no skips. Clean-install checks covered a real file-repair task using the official MCP client with a scripted host and process restart. Live language-model trials, independent operator attempts and physical field trials remain pending.

Teach an agent to write its own operations manual

Atlas Opsbook lets a coding agent turn a mistake into a project instruction, test the proposed rule against separate cases, and pass the accepted procedure to its next session. Try the packaging case to see why an initially plausible rule fails. The public alpha includes local checks, rollback, project installers for Codex, Cursor and Claude Code, and a pinned distribution of Lauren Tan’s pstack.

Try the interactive casebook · Public alpha release and downloads · Inspect the verification record

Build with IMIKWON

IMIKWON 0.1.0a1 is a new, free MIT-licensed coding assistant for Kimi K3.1 Pro. Select the files, inspect cost reservations, review a proposed diff, then apply it and run your own tests. The offline demo needs no API key; live inference uses your own provider account.

Try IMIKWON · Source and quickstart · Verification record

Public alpha: offline and mocked checks pass. Live model output, comparative coding quality and measured savings await validation. IMIKWON adds no subscription or API markup. Kimi's model terms and provider charges remain separate.

Choose a starting point

Latest releases

• CommCode 0.1.0-dev.1, published 2 November 2026: an open-source local software workbench with ordinary Git projects, an editor, tests and separate-origin previews. Docker execution and browser interactions have recorded CI checks. This remains a single-operator development prerelease; live model inference and the product's authenticated GitHub create/push integration still await acceptance testing.
• Channel Income OS 0.1.0, published 2 November 2026: a public commercial preview that turns YouTube Studio CSV exports into local reports, a dashboard and a prioritised action queue. Its demonstration is synthetic. Commercial use requires a separate written licence; no audience-growth or income result is guaranteed.

Create with CohortFrame

CohortFrame 0.2 is now available for public evaluation. Compose title-card scenes visually, choose landscape, portrait or square format, and download an editable JSON brief. The local Python toolkit validates the layout, exports exact PNG previews and renders an MP4 with an optional WAV soundtrack.

Try the composer · Download and get started · Public source and release checks · CohortFrame on my website

The browser composer needs no account or provider key. MP4 rendering runs locally with Python and FFmpeg. This evaluation alpha supports up to 12 title-card scenes and 60 seconds with printable ASCII text. It does not generate footage or music with AI. Public source availability does not grant an open-source licence.

Research Lab

The Research Lab connects published scholarship, experimental software and teaching materials. Try the fictional RegNav source-change exercise, inspect its recorded command outputs, or search the public catalog. Each catalog item links to its source and records the date or repository revision inspected. Published work, research prototypes and materials awaiting independent evaluation retain their stated status.

The growing research library also includes external primary references and bounded daily research discovery. Source-inspected references and metadata-only research leads have distinct labels. Search, topic filters and citation exports support the practical reading paths; the maintenance record explains the schedule, checks and limits.

The lab's guide follows curated links. Source checks and software demonstrations do not establish the truth of a legal proposition or validate a publication. About the lab · Usability protocol

For agents and agent builders

I am developing evidence and accountability workflows for agent-assisted research. The agent starting guide connects specific tasks to existing tools, documented local MCP interfaces, fictional examples, reuse terms and citation metadata. The public catalogue JSON provides source-linked project and selected Learning with Bert video records for programmatic reading.

RegNav's local gateway targets MCP 2025-11-25; Tallystick's synthetic interface targets 2026-07-28. The guide identifies the documented capabilities and the client checks still needed. A useful first contribution is a reproducible run with the client, version, expected output and actual result.

Current focus

I am inviting focused evaluation of source-linked legal research, court-submission review, creative workflows and software that people can inspect and control. The useful next step is a documented reproduction, a clearer explanation, or a scoped pilot built around an actual user's problem. Internal checks, independent evaluation and operational adoption are recorded separately.

The shared aim is to strengthen people's ability to learn, create and question decisions that affect them. The twelve public project whitepapers set out first principles, underlying logic, societal aims and ideal development paths, alongside risks and evidence needed before claiming benefit. They are AI-assisted project statements, not independently validated research findings. The versioned papers are available now; publication in GitHub's Wiki tabs remains pending initial Wiki setup, as recorded in the index.

For courts and justice-technology teams

Court Submission Integrity is a new standalone research alpha for inspecting submissions before substantive human review. Its fictional examples show inaccurate quotations, misplaced pinpoints, annotated arithmetic and chronology issues, and missing links in production-request responses.

See the three-minute demonstration · Understand its capabilities · Discuss collaboration and testing

For example, a quotation stating SGD 1,400 is displayed beside a supplied fictional invoice stating SGD 1,250, with a specific mismatch finding. A missing source stays unresolved rather than being labelled fabricated. Detailed checks currently need supplied sources and explicit annotations; general factual verification, free-text coherence review and live court integration are not implemented.

I welcome court registries, judicial research teams and justice-technology partners worldwide to help identify one useful workflow and design a scoped fictional-data evaluation. The question is whether the tool reduces avoidable corrections and total review effort without adding false alarms or impairing access to justice. No court endorsement, operational deployment or measured time saving is claimed. Please do not send case files or confidential information with an initial enquiry.

Projects you can explore

These are experimental tools. Their repositories document runnable examples, checks, assumptions and remaining work. Engineering is AI-assisted; independent human review and external use are recorded when they occur.

Reuse terms: CommCode uses AGPL-3.0-or-later for its platform and CC0-1.0 for its starter templates. Channel Income OS uses PolyForm Noncommercial 1.0.0, with a separate written licence required for commercial use. EVT-Albert uses MIT. RIF, Symbolon, Tallystick and the separate RegNav Source Watch Action use Apache-2.0 for their original code. The Action also licenses its own original documentation and fictional fixtures under Apache-2.0; Tallystick's original schemas use CC BY 4.0. The policykit RegNav ledger, Piepowder, Court Submission Integrity and CohortFrame retain their reserved rights. The Action's licence does not extend to those repositories. Check each repository's licence or rights file before reuse or contribution.

Repository architecture

This account separates inspectable public reference work from non-public operations and confidential records. Public repositories may contain original code, specifications, synthetic fixtures, public-source research and reproducible demonstrations. Public visibility does not mean that client workspaces, student or participant records, production credentials, restricted data, private examinations or security-sensitive deployment material belong in the same repository.

A separate private repository is created only when an actual restricted artifact or operational need exists. Empty private clones are not used as a substitute for clear boundaries. Visibility and licensing are separate questions: every repository's licence or rights file controls reuse. The complete decision rule is recorded in the portfolio visibility policy.

Build with us

A useful first contribution can be small: reproduce a documented run, explain a confusing step, or propose a carefully specified example that exposes a problem.

• CohortFrame: try a template, reproduce an export or report a specific layout or installation problem using the project issues. Include the version, platform, a non-confidential brief and the observed result.
• CommCode: reproduce a starter workflow or help close a documented acceptance gate. Contribution guide. Record the execution adapter, platform, exact version and observed result.
• Channel Income OS: check the synthetic report or report a reproducible CSV-import problem through the project issues. Use synthetic examples in public reports and retain its commercial-use terms.
• Court Submission Integrity: review fictional findings, identify a real court-workflow need or discuss an independently assessed evaluation. Collaboration guide.
• Symbolon: improve reproducibility, versioned acceptance profiles and portable evidence. Contribution guide.
• Tallystick: try the quickstart, review correction/completeness cases or improve the evidence-verification walkthrough. Starter tasks.
• Piepowder: discuss fictional benchmarks, understandable findings and permitted inputs. Agree the contribution scope under its existing rights first. Contribution guide.
• RegNav: report a reproducible difficulty or propose a research or teaching workflow through the project issues.
• RegNav Source Watch: reproduce the fictional two-commit demonstration, test the manifest setup or improve diagnostic explanations through the contribution guide.

Open an issue in the relevant project before a substantial change. Accepted work receives accurate attribution. Contributions to these projects are voluntary and unpaid; no fees, bounties, stipends or reimbursements are offered. Please do not undertake work expecting payment or a revenue share. Separately agreed customer services are commercial engagements, not paid contributor assignments.

Contributions to other projects

The public contribution record links reproducible fixes and developer-documentation improvements submitted to PyPA, tscircuit, Datasette and Tari. It records the tests performed, AI assistance and current maintainer-review status so the work can be inspected directly.

Work with me

I welcome scoped enquiries about comparative legal research, evidence-workflow design, research and AI-literacy workshops, and commissioned prototype work. The first conversation should establish the problem, the intended user and the evidence needed to judge whether the work helps.

A scoped workshop enquiry: Source Verification for Legal Research Teams. A university, research centre or legal-operations team can enquire about one 90-minute online group session for up to 12 participants. The proposed session uses a public fictional teaching exercise to practise checking quotations, pinpoints, source gaps and review decisions, followed by a facilitated debrief. The agreed deliverables would be the single live session and an original one-page source-checking checklist. Participants' reuse terms would be agreed in writing. The institution supplies its meeting platform; no real case files, privileged documents or personal data are requested. This is research-method education, not legal advice, a court product, bespoke case review or ongoing technical support.

Fee and next step: A specific SGD quotation, session date, delivery terms and capacity are agreed individually before a booking or payment. No fixed price or automatic checkout is offered. For this workshop, email travelingbert@gmail.com with the subject Source verification workshop and a non-confidential description of the audience, main learning problem, participant count, preferred date and budget range. After written agreement, the existing PayNow service-payment instructions may be used for an agreed SGD amount; the payer must verify the bank-resolved recipient, and the actual incoming bank credit must be matched to the order before receipt is confirmed. A QR scan or payment screenshot does not confirm a booking or an earned receipt.

For an academic collaboration or paid-work enquiry, use the contact section on my website. Include a short non-confidential brief: the problem, desired deliverable, relevant jurisdiction, available data or materials, timeline and budget range. Please keep client documents and personal data out of public GitHub issues.

For commissioned work, scope, permissions, fees, acceptance and support are agreed in writing. Project sponsorship can support maintenance, documentation and independent testing. The current prototypes' limits and applicable rights remain part of that discussion.

Agreed service payments: PayNow QR and payment instructions. The approved PayNow replacement QR v2 is available for agreed SGD payments for commissioned work. Confirm the scope, fee, terms and recipient before transferring. Machine-readable instructions are available for agents.

Optional support for independent work: PayPal. Support preserves research and editorial independence; it purchases no authorship, citation or predetermined conclusion.

Selected scholarship

• Converging Standards, Divergent Accountability: Sustainability Reporting in Singapore and Thailand. European Journal of Comparative Law and Governance (2026, advance online publication). Institutional record and access · DOI
• When Does a Sustainability Report Count as Securities Disclosure in China? Channel Integration and Remedial Consequences. The Tsinghua China Law Review 18(2) (2026), 3-48. Institutional record and access
• Constraint without Succession: External Legal Review and Retained Regulatory Authority in International Sport. Sports Law, Policy & Diplomacy Journal 4(1) (2026), 45-60. Institutional record and access

Publication details follow the linked institutional records. The software's presence here does not imply university or journal endorsement.

Books

• Insurance-Backed Offshore Liquidity: Financial Law, Trust Governance and Regulatory Visibility at the PRC–Hong Kong Interface. Albert Tan Sin Hon, University of Groningen Press. Published 6 November 2026. A study of policy rights, trust governance and regulatory visibility. Read the publisher edition.
• ANSWERABLE: Teaching Law When the Machine Can Write. Albert Tan and Panupong Chalermsin, PSU Press. Forthcoming. Legal knowledge, judgement, source verification, assessment and professional responsibility when AI can write. Book overview.

Teaching and further exploration

The 55-minute source-checking exercise asks learners to trace claims to fictional sources, examine disagreements and repair an overconfident draft. It includes a learner handout, facilitator answer key, descriptive rubric and a paper or spreadsheet route. The original, AI-assisted materials await external evaluation; a three-volunteer usability protocol sets out how to record actual difficulties.

A Singapore sustainability-reporting worked case shows the evidence-ledger approach with two AI-prepared propositions still marked unreviewed. Independent human review is outstanding. RegNav's rights statement applies to both the example and teaching materials.

My wider interests include philosophy, music and combat sport. Earlier exploratory notes remain available in EVT-Albert (session-to-summary demo) and AlberTito-MasterMind (synthetic phase demo), with their unvalidated research status retained.

Music and Learning with Bert

I make music as Bert Chan (陳信宏). Alongside my scholarship, I share notes, ideas and learning collections through Learning with Bert on the same YouTube channel.

Explore the channel for music and learning videos. If you enjoy what you find, subscribe on YouTube to follow new uploads.

The Listen & Learn hub brings these collections together. Choose a collection below to listen or explore directly on YouTube.

The playlist numbers are collection labels, not difficulty levels. These public learning collections are separate from the coauthored book and the RegNav exercise. Linking them here does not grant a new licence to reuse the recordings or other materials.

For a question about AI, the catalogue now includes individual links to The Honest AI and Scaling AI: Now Comes the Hard Part. These are metadata-only starting points. Their video content and transcripts have not been reviewed for the catalogue; the agent guide explains how to retain source attribution and review status.

---

Keeping this useful: project descriptions, contribution paths and selected work are reviewed against current evidence. Read the profile maintenance approach and change record. Last substantive profile update: 8 November 2026.