Product

The logical backend, end to end

An immutable observation log, a bounded logic engine, a contract layer humans approve, and a Studio that debugs by provenance instead of print statements.

The loop

Production feeds development. Deterministically.

When a contained agent misbehaves in production, the misbehavior becomes a checked artifact — not a war-room story. One artifact chain, both directions.

  1. 01

    Provenance pins the cause

    Follow the line backward from the bad intent to the exact observations that produced it — without reading generated logic.

  2. 02

    The counterexample becomes a fixture

    Promote the pinned timeline into a deterministic Scenario. It now fails, permanently and reproducibly, until the behavior is fixed.

  3. 03

    An authoring agent iterates

    Your coding agent regenerates rules until the fixture passes — against the real evaluator, with a deterministic oracle instead of vibes.

  4. 04

    Verification confirms the fix

    tarski verify re-checks the whole corpus and every invariant. You approve evidence, not a diff of internals.

Memory

Nothing is forgotten. And it costs S3 prices.

The observation log is the canonical truth, so it is kept forever: sealed, content-addressed segments on object storage, laid out by the ontology itself. Semantic indexes let queries skip what they can't reach.

Provenance chains, replay, and audits reach into cold history through the same indexes. The hot set is bounded by what the semantics can touch — not by how much history exists.

observation log · append-only
o#1039  chat.msg        "any wiggle room on price?"
o#1040  proposal.offer  tahoe · $31,400        ← llm
o#1041  policy.floor    tahoe · $33,900
o#1042  mgr.confirmed   discount_request        ✗ no
─────────────────────────────────────────────
intent  send_offer($31,400)   refused · violates
                              no_offer_below_floor
⊨ model consistent · log sealed · replay exact
Invariants

The walls are not guidelines

You declare the states the business must never reach. The engine evaluates every proposed transition against them — at every fixpoint, before anything touches the world. A violating transition isn't flagged for review. It doesn't happen.

This is why it doesn't matter how a stochastic model arrived at a decision. Tarski evaluates whether the output is logically sound — and refuses it if it isn't, with a receipt naming the invariant.

Containment

Free inside the sandbox

Runtime LLMs work behind two relay surfaces. Fallible sensors write candidate.* facts; fallible deciders write proposal.* actions. Neither becomes truth or effect until a rule you wrote — and can inspect — promotes it.

No rule may derive an accepted fact or executable intent directly from a fallible tool's output. That is a property of the logic fragment Tarski accepts — not a prompt, not a policy model.

Provenance · Studio

The zero-code debugger

Every derived fact carries explicit edges to the observations that caused it. In Studio, debugging an agent is following a visual line backward — from effect, to intent, to facts, to observations. The generated rules never need to be read.

effect#e91
send_offer
unexpected
intent#i77
offer.ratified
admitted
fact
discount.approved
derived · rule r14
obs#o1042
mgr.confirmed = no
← the cause, pinned

rule r14 read the confirmation's presence, not its value — promote this timeline to a fixture and hand it back to the agent.

Agent tooling

Effortless for the agent you already use

Tarski doesn't ship a coding agent. It ships the docs, skills, and machine-checkable feedback that let Claude Code, Codex, Devin, or any capable agent scaffold, author, verify, and ship — without Tarski needing to be the agent.

tarski scaffold

Pattern-aware starts

Chat, sensor, and decision patterns land as minimal real apps whose first verify is green.

tarski verify

A deterministic oracle

Tactical feedback for every generated rule: scenario results, invariant checks, and load-time gates the agent iterates against.

the architecture plane

Strategy, checked too

Module maps, composition verdicts, and coverage reports give agents machine-checkable answers to "how should this system be split?" — boundaries computed from the ontology, not negotiated.

Build on ground that cannot lie to you.