The full upstream README, mirrored here for reference. Install config, tool schemas, adoption signals, and an original overview live on the Leanforge MCP listing page.
MCP server for AI-driven formal proof search in Lean 4. Submit a theorem with sorry; get back a machine-verified proof. Implements Agent A from AlphaProof Nexus (DeepMind, May 2026).
Stack: Python 3.12+ . FastMCP 3.4+ . FastAPI . React/Vite . Tailwind . Lean 4 / Mathlib
Feed it a Lean 4 theorem with a sorry placeholder. It runs N parallel agents in a loop: the LLM proposes a proof edit, the Lean compiler judges it, errors feed back to the LLM. First agent to produce a sorry-free compile wins.
The compiler is the only oracle -- if it compiles without sorry, the proof is correct.
Then add to claude_desktop_config.json:
See INSTALL.md for the Lean + Mathlib workspace setup (~4GB, one-time -- already provisioned and verified on Goliath as of 2026-07-09).
| Tool | Description |
|---|---|
submit_theorem | Submit a theorem statement → job ID (async) |
submit_lean_file | Submit a full .lean file with sorry placeholders |
get_proof_status | Poll job status; returns proof when complete |
list_attempts | Inspect the attempt trajectory per agent/turn |
list_jobs | List all jobs with status summary |
validate_lean | Raw Lean 4 compile -- no job tracking |
cancel_job | Cancel a running job |
get_mathlib_search | Natural language search over Mathlib theorems |
winget install leanprover.elan)deepseek-prover-v2:7b for tier-1 (local, free)| Doc | Contents |
|---|---|
| INSTALL.md | Prerequisites, Lean workspace setup, Claude Desktop config |
| docs/CONFIGURATION.md | All config options and environment variables |
| docs/TOOLS.md | Full tool reference with parameters and examples |
| docs/ARCHITECTURE.md | Proof loop, tier escalation, job lifecycle, SQLite schema |
| docs/LEAN.md | Lean 4 language reference, tactic guide, bibliography, link collection |
| docs/LEAN_PRIMER.md | Quick Lean 4 intro for engineers (short version) |
| docs/ALPHAPROOF_NEXUS.md | The technique: AlphaProof Nexus paper explained |
| docs/COVERAGE_GAP.md | Why DeepMind got MSM coverage and a startup wouldn't |
| docs/BENCHMARK_RESULTS.md | MiniF2F, PutnamBench, Erdős results |
| docs/DEVELOPMENT.md | Contributing, dev setup, test commands |
| docs/TROUBLESHOOTING.md | Common errors and fixes |
| Phase | What | Status |
|---|---|---|
| A | Core loop: LLM proposes, Lean judges, error feeds back | Done |
| B | Correctness hardening, edge case handling, timeout tuning | Done (2026-07-09) -- tamper guard closed against default-arg truncation and a decoy-duplicate attack, cross-process job ownership/cancellation fixed, stateless-prompting mitigations added. 56/56 tests passing on real hardware. See docs/ASSESSMENT_2026-06-24.md |
| C | Performance and safety: REPL worker pool (compile-time is the real bottleneck), LLM timeout/retry, token/cost accounting (hard gate before any batch run) | In progress -- see TODO.md |
| D | Multi-agent parallel scheduling (Agent B from paper) -- run N loops in parallel, first to finish wins | Planned |
| E | Self-critique step -- LLM reviews its own proof before compile, catches obvious errors early | Planned |
| F | Webapp proof explorer -- interactive tree view of attempted proof paths, live tactic streaming | Planned |
| G | Premise selection -- before generating tactics, search Mathlib for relevant lemmas | Planned |
| H | Cumulative context windowing -- smart summarization of long error chains instead of blind concatenation | Planned |
| I | Benchmark dashboard -- webapp page tracking MiniF2F, PutnamBench, Erdős results per model/config | Stretch |
| J | Human-in-the-loop -- when the agent is stuck, pause and surface the current state for a human hint | Stretch |
| K | Proof caching -- deduplicate sub-proofs so repeated lemmas compile instantly | Stretch |
A + B let you submit a theorem and get a proof back on the other end. It works, it's useful, but it's single-threaded, pays a full compile per turn, and has no spend controls -- Phase C closes those gaps.
D changes the game: N parallel agents means wall-clock time drops from "however long one LLM takes" to "however long the fastest of N LLMs takes." For hard theorems where the LLM wanders into dead ends, this is the difference between 5 minutes and 30 seconds.
E prevents the LLM from wasting compiles on obviously wrong tactics. Cheap to add (one extra LLM call per attempt) and the paper shows it improves solve rate by ~15 percentage points on Agent A alone.
F is the user-facing payoff: instead of staring at "status: running" and polling, you watch the LLM try tactics in real time, see which paths it abandoned, and understand why it eventually succeeded or failed.
G addresses the most common failure mode: the LLM writes a correct tactic for a lemma that doesn't exist in the current context. Premise selection (a small retrieval step before tactic generation) cuts this dramatically.
H is invisible but critical: as the LLM accumulates 10+ failed attempts, the error context grows past the model's window. Smart summarization keeps relevant signal without drowning the LLM in noise.
Full gap analysis: docs/ASSESSMENT_2026-06-24.md
MIT