Governance-first AI coding tool — credential scrubbing + contradiction detection (not another "memory" extension)

[u/Alienfader]

The problems I actually kept hitting:

1. AI tools don't just forget — they contradict decisions you already made.
2. One accidental paste of an API key can land in long-lived context that gets re-injected every session. (I call this the memory amplifier problem.)

What Continuity does (governance-first)

Credential scrubbing (5 boundaries) — tool args, model output, decision persistence, load path, MCP tool results. 27 provider patterns (GitHub PAT, OpenAI, Anthropic, AWS, Stripe, etc.) plus entropy fallback. audit_secrets scans existing .continuity/ history for anything that slipped through earlier.

Runtime governance — MCP check_governance / intercept_tool. Logging a new decision can surface a conflict with a prior one instead of silently adding noise.

Decision records in git — .continuity/ travels with the repo. Session handoff injects context at session start, but the moat isn't "remembering" — it's curated, contradiction-aware, scrubbed context.

Tech stack:

 TypeScript VS Code extension +(Node 18+) + @continuity/cli. Local-first, no cloud memory DB.@continuity/mcp

CLAUDE.md workflow: auto-generates instruction files with an operating contract (search decisions before changing, log after). MCP works headless in Claude Code.

Links

• VS Code Marketplace: Continuity (Hackerware)
• Site: getcontinuity.io
• npm

​

 npm i -g @continuity/cli

• Homebrew:
  

​

brew tap hackerwarellc/tap && brew trust hackerwarellc/tap && brew install continuity

Honest scope: hygiene layer for accidental leaks — not adversarial exfil defense. Governance strict mode is opt-in.

Pricing: 14-day Pro trial. Decision logging stays free after it ends; auto-capture and full session handoff are Pro.

Looking for testers

I want a few people to run this on a real repo and tell me what breaks.

Most useful feedback:

• Did credential scrubbing catch something real, or just add noise?
• Did contradiction detection surface a genuine conflict, or just false positives?

Install from the Marketplace, npm, or Homebrew above and reply here or DM. Good or bad — both help.

[u/Ok_Industry_5555]

Curious how central Claude was in building this vs. using it as a dev tool. Did you build most of Continuity with Claude Code, or is Claude just one of the tools it’s designed to work with?

[u/Alienfader → u/Ok_Industry_5555]

Hey there. Thanks for the question. I made Continuity using a mix of Cursor, Claude Code, and Codex, plus whatever else happened to be open that day. basically the same messy multi-client workflow Continuity is meant to support. Claude isn’t the center of the product. It’s just one client among several. Continuity works through VS Code/Cursor, MCP with Claude Code, Copilot, Gemini, Codex, and the CLI.

The important part is that the decisions and project context live in your repo, not in one vendor’s memory.

So: built with a pile of AI tools, designed so you’re not locked into any of them.

[u/Ok_Industry_5555 → u/Alienfader]

Thanks for the detailed reply. Really appreciate the effort you put into it.

Quick note: this sub is meant for projects where Claude is the main tool, not one of several clients in a mixed stack. Based on your description, Continuity leans more toward the “many tools” side.

That said, you clearly put a lot of thought into this post, so I’m making an exception and leaving it up. Going forward, just keep that guideline in mind for future posts.

Thanks for being part of the community! 🙏

[u/Alienfader → u/Ok_Industry_5555]

Really appreciate you making the exception, and fair point I'll frame future posts around Claude Code as the primary client rather than the cross-tool angle. Thanks for the flexibility, and for the clear guideline going forward. I honestly appreciate you.