MedHarness
AI coding harness for teams shipping software under design control.
AI can write the code. It cannot tell you which requirement the change serves, which risk it touches, or whether the traceability still holds — and under IEC 62304 those are the parts that decide whether the work counts.
MedHarness closes that gap. It reads the design behind a change request, drives the implementation from it, then checks the result against the design again with ordinary code — no model is asked whether the work is done.
What only it can tell you
Your issue tracker manages one item well. It cannot take every item together and ask whether the V-model still holds — whether each requirement gives rise to the next, whether a chain closes back on itself, which risks a change touches. That analysis is what MedHarness is for, and it reads items as data, so it works whether they live in YAML here or in Jira.
$ medharness --dhf DHF verify dhf
FAIL [cycle] SRS-014 → SYS-006 → SRS-014
Fix: the V-model is directed. Remove whichever link reverses the chain so each item has an origin.
FAIL [required] SRS-022: SRS derives_from → SYS (count=0, need ≥1)
WARN [coverage] RISK→RCM: 3/4 covered
Fix: dhfkit --dhf DHF item list --type RCM to find uncovered items, then add dhf_links to their YAML.
Advisory only — pass --fail-on-uncovered to block the build on this.
Error: DHF validation failed.
A cycle means two items each derive from the other, so neither has an origin and the matrix loses the direction that makes it a matrix. A missing required link means a requirement traces to nothing above it. Both are structural — they block.
Incomplete design (WARN) blocks only under --fail-on-uncovered, because it is
design still to be written. Conflating the two is what makes traceability checks
something teams learn to ignore.
Storage-level checks — schema, and links whose target does not exist — come from
dhfkit and run in the same pass. A backend that enforces referential integrity
of its own makes them redundant; the analysis above it does not go away.
How a change moves
Every change is a Change Request on a fixed path. AI drafts, humans approve, deterministic gates decide whether it can close.
flowchart LR
CR["CR-042<br/>opened"] --> PLAN
PLAN["change plan<br/><br/>AI drafts DHF items<br/>and impact analysis"] --> REV{"Human<br/>review"}
REV -.->|rejected| PLAN
REV -->|"/approve"| IMPL["change implement<br/><br/>AI writes code<br/>and tests"]
IMPL --> GATES["Verification gates<br/><br/>verify dhf<br/>verify tests<br/>verify soup<br/>change verify-completion"]
GATES -.->|any gate fails| IMPL
GATES ==>|all pass| MERGE["Merge to main<br/><br/>evidence bundle<br/>release baseline"]
style PLAN fill:#4c6ef5,color:#fff,stroke:#364fc7
style IMPL fill:#4c6ef5,color:#fff,stroke:#364fc7
style REV fill:#f59f00,color:#fff,stroke:#e67700
style GATES fill:#f1f3f5,color:#212529,stroke:#868e96
style MERGE fill:#2f9e44,color:#fff,stroke:#2b8a3e
Only the blue steps call a model. Everything in the verification band is ordinary code. See docs/ai-security.md for the boundary in detail — including how to run with no AI at all.
Install
mkdir my-device && cd my-device
python -m venv .venv && source .venv/bin/activate
pip install medharness
medharness init
medharness init scaffolds DHF/ (config, items, documents), AI-harness/,
and prompt templates. Extras: medharness[ai] for the AI workflow,
medharness[docs] for PDF export, medharness[full] for both.
Check the environment at any point:
medharness doctor
Before enabling the AI stages
change plan and change implement need a model CLI or API key, which pip
cannot install:
npm install -g @anthropic-ai/claude-code # default path, provides the `claude` CLI
Read docs/ai-security.md first. These stages run an agentic loop with an unrestricted shell tool and are designed for an ephemeral CI runner, not a workstation holding your credentials.
Everything else — traceability, validation, gates, evidence bundles — is deterministic and needs no model access.
First change request
git init && git add -A && git commit -m "feat: initialize DHF"
# Edit DHF/items/07_cr/CR-001.yaml, then:
medharness --dhf DHF change plan --cr CR-001 # AI drafts DHF items + impact analysis
# review and approve the design PR, then:
medharness --dhf DHF change implement --cr CR-001 # AI writes code and tests
medharness --dhf DHF verify dhf # gates decide whether it can close
Deploy to CI
MedHarness does not install a CI workflow — it would reference your branch
names, runners, and secrets, and medharness upgrade will never overwrite it.
Pin the version and call the gates:
name: DHF
on:
pull_request:
paths: ['DHF/**']
jobs:
dhf-validate:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
- uses: actions/setup-python@v5
with:
python-version: '3.11'
- run: pip install medharness==0.26.2
- run: medharness --dhf DHF verify dhf --fail-on-uncovered
Drop --fail-on-uncovered while backfilling an existing DHF: coverage gaps then
report as WARN, and only schema, required links, and dangling links block.
medharness verify --help lists the gates; each subcommand's --help gives its options.
docs/interface.md is the contract to build against — result
shape, exit codes, and what may change.
docs/adopting.md carries the full workflow
with evidence bundles and release baselines.
Commands
dhfkit owns DHF data — storage and retrieval, no analysis. medharness
owns the analysis over the item set and the process around it. A team whose
DHF already lives in Jira or Azure DevOps keeps that and still needs the
analysis.
Both take --dhf DHF; dhfkit also reads COMPLIANTFLOW_DHF.
Every command writes JSON to stdout and human-readable lines to stderr, so
cmd > out.json gives you the payload and the terminal still reads normally.
Gates — verify * and change verify-* — all answer with the same
envelope, so one CI step can handle any of them:
{"gate": "verify dhf", "passed": false, "summary": "FAIL — 1 link cycle(s)",
"errors": ["..."], "warnings": ["..."], "details": {}}
0 the gate passed · 1 it failed (JSON on stdout) or a usage error was raised
before it ran (no stdout) · 2 argument parsing failed.
Gates on the DHF — no CR needed
Run these on any DHF, whether or not the project uses the AI change workflow.
| Command | Returns in details |
Use it when |
|---|---|---|
medharness verify dhf |
results.schema, results.traceability (required-rule failures, dangling links, cycles), results.coverage |
Every push. This is the one gate a DHF cannot do without: it is the only check that reads the items together and asks whether the V-model closes. |
medharness verify tests --junit-dir test-results |
missing_method, unverified_test, manual_review_required |
After the test job, to prove each requirement was verified by the method it declared — a Test-verified requirement needs a passing linked test, not just any evidence. |
medharness verify soup --manifest requirements.txt |
drift (register vs manifests), vulnerabilities (OSV), accepted |
Nightly and before a release. Answers both §8.1.2 questions at once: is the register what actually ships, and is any of it known-vulnerable. --offline-mode warn for air-gapped runners. |
medharness verify classification |
safety_class, missing_plans, rationale |
Once a safety class is declared, to check the §5.1 plans that class requires exist. Warns and exits 0 until you declare one, so it is safe to wire before you have decided. |
Gates on a change request
These read fields change plan writes, so they apply only to a project running
the CR workflow. A PR with no CR passes them.
| Command | Returns in details |
Use it when |
|---|---|---|
medharness change verify-branch --cr CR-034 |
promised_but_unchanged, cr_found, findings |
On the PR. Checks the branch actually changed the items the CR listed in affected_items — a CR that promised to touch SYS-001 and did not is caught before review, not after. |
medharness change verify-completion --cr CR-034 --junit-dir test-results |
incomplete_cr_fields, missing_items, verification_gaps, unverified_test, manual_review_required |
Twice. On the branch to block the merge — the CR fields, the approval and the proposed items settle there. Again on main, where the tests re-run against whatever else landed. Reports only items this CR touched. |
medharness change verify-approval --cr CR-034 --stage design --pr 42 |
approved, approvals, stale_approvals, head_sha, stage |
Before merging. Requires an approving GitHub review whose commit is the one being merged; an approval of an earlier commit is reported as stale and fails. --stage is recorded, not searched on — the commit is what separates design from develop. Needs GH_TOKEN. |
The AI change workflow
| Command | Returns | Use it when |
|---|---|---|
medharness change plan --cr CR-034 |
outcome, items_changed, review_cycles, diagnostics |
The CR has been triaged. Drafts the whole DHF item cascade and the impact analysis, then validates its own output and fixes what it broke. |
medharness change implement --cr CR-034 |
outcome, files_changed, review_cycles |
The design is approved. Writes code and tests against the cascade. --pr 42 revises from review feedback; --ci-failures from a failing run. |
medharness automation github-event |
cr_id, stage, action, pr_number, mode, reason |
First step of a workflow. Reads the GitHub event and says which CR and stage it concerns and what to do — so the workflow branches on one command's output instead of a ladder of if expressions. |
Context for an agent
All three print JSON to stdout and make no changes.
| Command | Returns | Use it when |
|---|---|---|
medharness context overview |
project, item_count, items, traceability, test_coverage |
An agent or a person is new to the DHF. traceability.valid is the same verdict verify dhf reaches. Pass --junit-dir to get real test coverage instead of {"computed": false}. |
medharness context implementation --cr CR-034 |
project, cr (the full item), items, traceability, module_map |
An agent is about to write code for a CR: which modules own which designs and requirements. |
medharness context for-stage develop --cr CR-034 |
stage, cr, affected_items (or traceability_gaps at analyze) |
You want the smaller answer — only what one stage needs, rather than the whole DHF. |
Evidence and release
| Command | Returns | Use it when |
|---|---|---|
medharness evidence bundle --out-dir artifacts |
gate_passed, manifest, artifacts |
On merge to main. Runs the acceptance gate and writes the read-only bundle an auditor reads: specifications, plans, traceability, test evidence, SBOM, and a manifest with a hash per file. --doc-format pdf needs medharness[docs]. |
medharness release baseline --version 1.0.0 --write |
version, cr_ids, rel_uid, artifacts, soup_count |
Cutting a release (IEC 62304 §9). Verifies every included CR is completed, freezes the software BOM, and writes the REL item. Dry-run without --write. |
medharness soup-sync --manifest requirements.txt --write |
to_create, to_update, orphans, items_created, items_updated |
A dependency changed. Reconciles the SOUP register with the project's manifests. Without --write it reports only — read that first: it writes items you then have to fill in a purpose and risk rating for. |
Setting up and keeping current
| Command | Returns | Use it when |
|---|---|---|
medharness init |
list of created paths | Once, in an empty project. Scaffolds the DHF, the AI harness, and a CI workflow. Never overwrites. |
medharness upgrade |
outdated, missing, up_to_date, installed_version |
After upgrading the package. Reports scaffold drift; --apply writes it. Your DHF items, global.yaml and context.md are never touched. |
medharness doctor |
checks, passed, failed |
CI is behaving oddly. Checks Python, the CLIs, gh auth, and whether the DHF config and adapter load. |
Storing and reading the DHF — dhfkit
| Command | Returns | Use it when |
|---|---|---|
dhfkit item list --type SYS |
one JSON object per line | Enumerating items of a type. |
dhfkit item get SRS-012 |
the item, with all_linked_uids resolved |
You need one item's fields and links. |
dhfkit item create --type SRS --data '{...}' |
the created item, with its assigned ID | Adding an item. The ID is allocated for you. |
dhfkit item update SRS-012 --data '{...}' |
the updated item | Changing fields. The JSON is merged, not replaced; editing an approved item returns it for re-approval. |
dhfkit item transition CR-034 completed |
the item in its new state | Moving an item through its lifecycle. Omit the state to get the transitions available and which criteria block the rest. |
dhfkit validate schema |
valid, item_count, errors |
Before committing. Every item against its doc-type schema. |
dhfkit doc generate SYS |
doc_type, output_path, version |
Building a specification document from the items. |
dhfkit doc export SYS --format pdf |
output_path |
Handing a specification to someone outside the repo. HTML is self-contained; PDF needs [docs]. |
dhfkit sbom |
path, components, without_purl |
You need a CycloneDX 1.6 SBOM from the SOUP register. without_purl counts the components no tool downstream can match. |
dhfkit init |
list of created paths | You want the DHF without the AI harness. |
Attribution is the commit, not a flag: dhfkit does not commit, so who changed
an item is whoever authored the commit that carried it.
--help on any subcommand carries the full surface.
Model configuration. Each stage falls back to the Anthropic Claude CLI
unless you set MEDHARNESS_{DESIGN,DESIGN_REVIEW,DEVELOP,CODE_REVIEW}_MODEL to
a provider:model value — anthropic, openai (OPENAI_API_KEY), or
deepseek (DEEPSEEK_API_KEY). MEDHARNESS_{STAGE}_BASE_URL points a stage at
Azure, Ollama, or vLLM. GH_TOKEN is required for --pr.
Seeing it run
ContourLab is a browser-based
contouring workspace for radiation oncology, maintained end-to-end with
MedHarness. Its DHF/ holds the real design inputs and traceability, every
change goes through the CR path above, and CI runs the gates on every PR. If you
want to read a production adoption before committing to one, start there.
Documentation
| docs/adopting.md | starting fresh, migrating an existing DHF, incremental adoption |
| docs/interface.md | the machine interface — result envelope, exit codes, stability |
| docs/ai-security.md | what the AI stages can do, isolation, audit trail, no-AI operation |
| docs/architecture.md | package boundaries, CR topology, scaffold layout |
| docs/adr/ · CHANGELOG.md | decision records; version history |
| CONTRIBUTING.md | contributor setup and local development |
dhfkit has no dependency on medharness, so the DHF engine can be adopted
standalone.
License
MIT. See LICENSE.
1 maintainer
Metadata
1 maintainer
Release files for medharness 0.26.2
For a detailed explanation of source distributions (sdists) and built distributions (wheels), please see the package formats documentation.
Source distribution (sdist)
| File | Size | Uploaded | |
|---|---|---|---|
| medharness-0.26.2.tar.gz | 212.4 kB | Details |
Built distribution (wheel)
| File | Interpreter | ABI | Platform | Reset |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| medharness-0.26.2-py3-none-any.whl | Python 3 | none | any | Details |
Total release size: 470.7 kB
Release files / medharness-0.26.2.tar.gz
| Download URL | medharness-0.26.2.tar.gz |
|---|---|
| Size | 212.4 kB |
| Tags | Source |
|
SHA-256 checksum How to use checksums |
a6d2fcf48efd832f91b871e53fa5560881847e2b622d787e06bc0e6e39431a68
|
|
BLAKE2b-256 checksum How to use checksums |
94696228fbdb38d80fb736e4cd29dfac8f3543c6bb9e91bbc9c7494b259f365e
|
| Upload date | |
|
Uploaded using Trusted Publishing? What is trusted publishing? |
Yes |
| Uploaded via |
twine/7.0.0 CPython/3.13.14
|
Provenance
Provenance describes where a file came from. On PyPI, provenance is shared via attestations, which provide a verifiable record of the build or publishing details. View details, limitations and caveats.
PyPI Publish Attestation
PyPI verified that this artifact, at this checksum, originated from the publisher listed below.
Signed by GitHub Actions, verified by PyPI on Sep 13, 2026.
Transparency logRelease files / medharness-0.26.2-py3-none-any.whl
| Download URL | medharness-0.26.2-py3-none-any.whl |
|---|---|
| Size | 258.2 kB |
| Tags | Python 3 |
|
SHA-256 checksum How to use checksums |
ed2c5925000f626d290d52ccfe3f9447bfe2988bef66ac3e02fe97bf6a81ce96
|
|
BLAKE2b-256 checksum How to use checksums |
e6b4ee8387d4c17065e8d41f999550a92e48ab9e9e6acc280949ab7ae3b1f77d
|
| Upload date | |
|
Uploaded using Trusted Publishing? What is trusted publishing? |
Yes |
| Uploaded via |
twine/7.0.0 CPython/3.13.14
|
Provenance
Provenance describes where a file came from. On PyPI, provenance is shared via attestations, which provide a verifiable record of the build or publishing details. View details, limitations and caveats.
PyPI Publish Attestation
PyPI verified that this artifact, at this checksum, originated from the publisher listed below.
Signed by GitHub Actions, verified by PyPI on Sep 13, 2026.
Transparency log
