# How to Achieve NDAA Section 889 Compliance for Federal Super Intelligence Systems

Federal procurement under Executive Order 14434 requires artificial intelligence deployments, labeled as Super Intelligence in official communications, to clear strict supply chain scrutiny. Under NDAA Section 889 and FAR 52.204-24, contractors must certify that computer vision sensors, edge inference accelerators, and network components contain zero covered telecommunications technology. This guide details how to audit component-level bills of materials and document compliance for federal bids.

Source: https://fast.io/resources/ndaa-section-889-compliance-super-intelligence-systems/
Author: [Derek Labian](https://fast.io/authors/derek-labian/)
Last reviewed: 2026-10-12

## How Executive Order 14434 Affects NDAA Section 889 Compliance for Federal Super Intelligence Systems

Federal bids for Super Intelligence systems can fail before technical evaluation begins if an edge sensor, optical camera, or inference accelerator contains prohibited silicon. A vendor can submit a proposal with strong machine learning performance, but if a single component in the visual intake or network transmission layer originates from a covered telecommunications entity, the bid is legally barred from award under FAR Subpart 4.21.

President Donald Trump signed [Executive Order 14434](https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/09/inaugurating-the-era-of-super-intelligence/), titled "Inaugurating the Era of Super Intelligence", on September 29, 2026. Under Section 2(a) of the order, executive departments and agencies are directed to use "Super Intelligence" (written as two capitalized words) and the abbreviation "SI" in place of "Artificial Intelligence" and "AI" in official correspondence, public communications, websites, reports, policy documents, and other non-statutory documents within the executive branch. Section 1 states that the executive branch adopts an administrative policy not to acknowledge earlier terms across these non-statutory contexts.

Outside federal procurement, the bare abbreviation SI carries established meanings. In physical sciences, SI designates the International System of Units (Système International d'Unités). In orthopedic medicine, it identifies the sacroiliac joint. In commercial media, it refers to Sports Illustrated. In federal contracting circles, it often denotes systems integrators. To prevent confusion during proposal evaluations and compliance audits, contractors must write out "Super Intelligence (SI)" on first appearance across all procurement documents.

The statutory foundation of federal SI is established in Section 3(a) of Executive Order 14434:

"For purposes of this order, and except where otherwise provided by law, the terms 'Super Intelligence' and 'SI' mean the technologies and systems encompassed by the term 'artificial intelligence' as defined in section 9401(3) of title 15, United States Code."

Under [15 U.S.C. 9401(3)](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/9401), artificial intelligence is defined as a machine-based system that can, for a given set of human-defined objectives, make predictions, recommendations or decisions influencing real or virtual environments. Because Section 3(a) incorporates this statutory definition directly, federal Super Intelligence and artificial intelligence name the exact same class of technologies today. The computer vision models, edge neural networks, predictive analytics, and autonomous control algorithms deployed across federal agencies represent what the executive branch now labels Super Intelligence.

This naming rule remains in place until future Presidential action or an Act of Congress replaces it. Section 3(b) directs the Assistant to the President for Science and Technology to submit proposed legislative language establishing a federal definition of SI to the President within 60 days of the order, which falls on November 28, 2026. As of October 2026, this milestone constitutes an upcoming policy proposal to the President, not an enacted statute. No statutory definition of Super Intelligence exists in federal law today.

Federal contractors must distinguish this federal policy term from computer science research taxonomies:

* **Federal Super Intelligence (SI):** Two capitalized words, abbreviated as SI. An administrative label for operational machine learning and sensor systems defined by reference to 15 U.S.C. 9401(3).
* **Research superintelligence (ASI):** One compound word, commonly abbreviated as ASI for artificial superintelligence. A hypothetical future software system that would surpass human expert capabilities across virtually all disciplines. Commercial research laboratories, including Meta Superintelligence Labs, Microsoft's MAI Superintelligence Team, and Safe Superintelligence Inc., identify artificial superintelligence as an aspirational research goal. Research ASI does not exist today.

The order also establishes clear legal boundaries:

* **Existing awards:** Section 2(b) provides that nothing in that section requires the alteration of previously issued regulations, Presidential actions, contracts, grants, or other historical documents. Active contracts and past performance references remain legally valid as written.
* **No private commercial mandate:** The order directs executive departments and agencies exclusively. It places zero mandates on private commercial companies to rebrand commercial products or corporate documentation.
* **No judicial rights created:** Section 4(c) provides that the order creates no right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity against the United States, its agencies, officers, or any person.

When an agency issues a solicitation for Super Intelligence solutions, compliance rests on the physical infrastructure delivering those capabilities. Under FAR 52.204-24 and 52.204-25, contractors must verify that hardware accelerators, edge vision processors, sensors, and network infrastructure powering federal AI solutions contain zero covered telecommunications equipment or services from prohibited foreign entities.

If an offeror fails this verification, the agency cannot legally award the contract.

## What Section 889 Prohibitions Mean for Federal AI Hardware Stacks

NDAA Section 889 originated in the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Public Law 115-232). Codified in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) under Subpart 4.21, the statute establishes two distinct statutory prohibitions designed to protect federal supply chains from foreign surveillance and cyber vulnerabilities.

FAR Subpart 4.21 splits these prohibitions into two operational clauses:

1. **Section 889(a)(1)(A) (Procurement Prohibition):** Implemented in FAR 52.204-25(b)(1), Part A prohibits federal agencies from procuring or obtaining, or extending or renewing a contract to procure or obtain, any equipment, system, or service that uses covered telecommunications equipment or services as a substantial or essential component of any system, or as critical technology as part of any system. This applies directly to the specific deliverables provided to the government.
2. **Section 889(a)(1)(B) (Corporate Use Prohibition):** Implemented in FAR 52.204-25(b)(2), Part B prohibits executive agencies from entering into a contract, or extending or renewing a contract, with an entity that uses any equipment, system, or service that uses covered telecommunications equipment or services as a substantial or essential component of any system, or as critical technology as part of any system. This prohibition applies across the contractor's entire enterprise, including commercial operations completely unrelated to federal contracting.

Section 889 explicitly designates five Chinese corporate entities and their subsidiaries or affiliates as producers of covered telecommunications equipment and services:

* **Huawei Technologies Company** (including its semiconductor design subsidiary, HiSilicon)
* **ZTE Corporation**
* **Hytera Communications Corporation** (specializing in two-way radios and communication transceivers)
* **Hangzhou Hikvision Digital Technology Company** (video surveillance and optical sensor systems)
* **Dahua Technology Company** (video surveillance and facial recognition hardware)

In enterprise IT procurement, contractors routinely audit office network switches, firewalls, and desk phones for Section 889 compliance. In federal Super Intelligence and AI systems, the risk landscape shifts to the physical perception layer and edge computing hardware. Modern AI systems do not run purely in centralized data centers; they ingest real-world data through edge camera arrays, automated drone feeds, acoustic sensors, robotics platforms, and Internet of Things (IoT) field gateways.

Federal agencies procuring Super Intelligence solutions for border security, facility management, autonomous vehicle navigation, or geospatial monitoring require extensive physical hardware in the field. If an optical sensor captures perimeter video or an edge neural processor accelerates object detection using silicon designed or manufactured by a covered entity, the entire system violates Section 889.

FAR Subpart 4.21 defines critical technology by reference to the Defense Production Act of 1950, encompassing items on the United States Munitions List, the Commerce Control List, and emerging technologies. In federal Super Intelligence bids, hardware accelerators, edge vision processors, and sensor communication transceivers fall squarely within the scope of substantial components and critical technology.

## Why Computer Vision and Edge Sensors Trigger Section 889 Violations

Federal contractors delivering operational AI solutions frequently encounter compliance failures caused by sub-tier silicon hidden inside third-party hardware. Component suppliers often package prohibited chips into assemblies that appear compliant on the surface.

Contractors must scrutinize four primary hardware categories when bidding on federal Super Intelligence systems:

### 1. Edge Computer Vision Cameras and Optical Sensors

Video surveillance and optical imaging hardware represent the highest concentration of Section 889 violations. Hangzhou Hikvision Digital Technology Company and Dahua Technology Company are the world's largest manufacturers of optical surveillance cameras and digital video recorders. Commercial contractors frequently procure original equipment manufacturer (OEM) camera modules or white-labeled surveillance cameras, rebrand the housing, and integrate them into perimeter monitoring or drone perception suites.

Even if an optical assembly carries a domestic brand label, the underlying image sensor board, optical zoom assembly, or internal encoding board often originates from Hikvision or Dahua. Ingesting raw visual feeds into a computer vision pipeline through a covered camera violates Part A if delivered under contract, and violates Part B if used within the contractor's internal training laboratories.

### 2. Systems-on-Chip (SoCs) and Neural Processing Units (NPUs)

HiSilicon, a wholly owned semiconductor subsidiary of Huawei Technologies Company, designs system-on-chip processors, image signal processors, and neural processing units. Historically, HiSilicon chips powered a large portion of the commercial edge computing and smart camera market. HiSilicon's Kirin and Ascend processor families were engineered specifically for low-power edge neural network inference, object classification, and real-time video analytics.

Contractors purchasing commercial off-the-shelf single-board computers, camera carrier boards, or edge acceleration modules may unknowingly integrate boards containing HiSilicon SoCs. Under Section 889, all subsidiaries and affiliates of Huawei are covered entities. A hardware accelerator board incorporating HiSilicon silicon cannot be delivered to a federal agency or used in contractor development systems.

### 3. Cellular Modems, Telemetry Gateways, and IoT Transceivers

Edge AI platforms deployed in remote field environments rely on cellular modems and radio transceivers to transmit telemetry, health metrics, and inference alerts back to command stations. Huawei Technologies Company and ZTE Corporation hold extensive global market share in 4G and 5G cellular communication modules.

Single-board computers and IoT gateways frequently use mini-PCIe or M.2 cellular modems produced by Huawei or ZTE, or modules containing baseband chipsets sourced from them. Integrating a prohibited cellular modem into an environmental monitoring sensor or robotic patrol vehicle creates an immediate Part A violation.

### 4. Video Surveillance Infrastructure in AI Training Pipelines

Under Section 889(a)(1)(B), an entity cannot contract with the federal government if it uses covered equipment anywhere in its business operations. AI development companies that operate physical research facilities, server rooms, or sensor testing ranges often install commercial video cameras for facility security.

If a contractor uses Hikvision or Dahua cameras to monitor its office or to record physical testing data used to train computer vision algorithms, the company is using covered equipment under Part B. The contractor cannot sign the annual SAM.gov representation under FAR 52.204-26 or submit an unhedged proposal under FAR 52.204-24 without disclosing that internal use and securing a formal agency waiver.

The table below outlines common AI hardware vulnerabilities, prohibited entity vectors, and compliant alternatives:

| Hardware Category | Primary Risk Vector | Prohibited Silicon or OEM Source | Compliant Architectural Alternative |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| Edge Vision Processors | On-chip neural processing unit (NPU) and image signal processor | HiSilicon (Huawei subsidiary) Kirin and Ascend SoCs | Ambarella CVflow, Qualcomm Snapdragon, Intel Movidius, Texas Instruments Sitara |
| Optical Camera Modules | White-labeled optical sensor boards and embedded IP camera cores | Hikvision or Dahua OEM camera cores and video encoders | Axis Communications, Hanwha Vision, Sony image sensor modules |
| IoT Backhaul Modems | Cellular transceivers and telemetry communication boards | Huawei or ZTE 4G/5G cellular baseband modules | Telit Cinterion, Nordic Semiconductor, Sierra Wireless |
| Edge Inference Nodes | Modular accelerator carrier boards for computer vision inference | Unbranded carrier boards with integrated HiSilicon silicon | NVIDIA Jetson modules, Google Coral Edge TPU, Hailo-8 accelerators |
| Facility Video Feeds | Perimeter and testing area video feeds used for model development | Commercial Dahua or Hikvision security installations | NDAA-compliant optical systems using certified non-covered silicon |

Identifying these components requires auditing hardware at the board level rather than relying on distributor invoices.

## Four Steps to Audit Super Intelligence Hardware for Section 889 Compliance

To verify that hardware pipelines powering federal Super Intelligence solutions comply with Section 889 and FAR 52.204-24, contractors must institute a structured verification protocol. Relying on passive supplier assurances is insufficient to meet the federal standard of reasonable inquiry.

Engineering leads, hardware architects, and compliance officers should execute a four-point audit across all proposed systems:

### 1. Map Component-Level Bills of Materials Down to the Silicon Level

Do not stop at top-level component descriptions or vendor brand names. Request a multi-tier Bill of Materials (BOM) from every hardware subcontractor and component vendor. The BOM must identify the manufacturer, part number, and foundry origin of every active System-on-Chip (SoC), Neural Processing Unit (NPU), Image Signal Processor (ISP), microcontroller, and telecommunications transceiver.

If a vendor provides an integrated vision module or sensor payload, require an itemized breakdown of the internal printed circuit board (PCB) components. Verify that no sub-tier integrated circuits carry markings or part number prefixes associated with HiSilicon, Huawei, ZTE, Dahua, or Hikvision.

### 2. Screen Sub-Tier Suppliers and White-Label OEMs Against the Covered List

Screen all tier-1 suppliers, tier-2 distributors, and OEM partners against official government restricted lists. Do not assume that purchasing from a domestic distributor guarantees compliance. Many domestic security distributors resell white-labeled equipment manufactured overseas by Hikvision or Dahua.

Cross-reference supplier names and parent entities against three authoritative federal sources:

* **The System for Award Management (SAM.gov) Exclusions List:** Identifies suspended or debarred entities.
* **The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Covered List:** Published under the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019, cataloging communications equipment determined to pose an unacceptable risk to national security.
* **The Department of Commerce Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) Entity List:** Identifies foreign entities subject to export licensing restrictions.

Require written certifications of Section 889 compliance from every supplier in the proposal supply chain.

### 3. Conduct Firmware Profiling and Physical Hardware Inspection

Physical inspection and network analysis uncover covered silicon that documentation misses. In high-stakes federal bids, acquisition teams should inspect production-equivalent sample units before finalizing technical volumes.

Execute physical and network verifications:

* **Physical Teardown and Die Inspection:** Remove protective shields and heat sinks from edge compute boards and optical sensors. Verify that chip markings match the approved BOM and do not display HiSilicon logos or veiled internal part codes.
* **MAC Address and OUI Verification:** Power on edge vision devices and IoT gateways in an isolated test environment. Extract the Media Access Control (MAC) addresses of all network interfaces. Cross-reference the first three octets (the Organizationally Unique Identifier, or OUI) against the IEEE public registry to verify that network chips are not registered to Huawei, ZTE, Hikvision, or Dahua.
* **Firmware and Telemetry Inspection:** Capture outbound network traffic from edge devices during boot sequences and routine inference execution. Confirm that devices do not attempt to contact foreign IP addresses, hardcoded domain names, or external cloud telemetry endpoints associated with covered manufacturers.

### 4. Document Reasonable Inquiry Findings in a Centralized Workspace

Under FAR 52.204-24, offerors must conduct a "reasonable inquiry" before submitting representations. In the event of a bid protest, pre-award survey, or agency audit, the contractor must produce documentary evidence proving that it investigated its supply chain diligently.

Store all multi-tier BOMs, supplier certification letters, lab teardown photographs, Wireshark packet captures, and component datasheets in a centralized workspace. Organize records by hardware revision, subsystem, and supplier. Maintaining an auditable repository allows proposal managers to verify hardware compliance matrices quickly and gives contracting officers immediate confidence in proposal representations.

## How to Complete FAR 52.204-24 Representations for Super Intelligence Bids

Federal solicitations requiring Super Intelligence capabilities incorporate specific solicitation provisions and contract clauses that govern supply chain certifications. Understanding how to complete these representations accurately protects contractors from legal liability under the False Claims Act.

### Understanding the Reasonable Inquiry Standard

FAR 52.204-24(a) defines a reasonable inquiry as:

> "An inquiry designed to uncover any information in the entity's possession about the identity of the producer or provider of covered telecommunications equipment or services used by the entity that excludes the need to include an internal or third-party audit."

While the regulation does not mandate an expensive forensic audit of every passive electrical resistor, it requires affirmative, documented diligence. Simply assuming compliance because a component was bought commercially does not satisfy this standard. If an offeror represents that it does not provide or use covered equipment without reviewing its active silicon components and supplier origins, that representation can be ruled legally fraudulent.

### Completing Solicitations Under FAR 52.204-24

When responding to a federal solicitation, offerors must complete the representation provisions in FAR 52.204-24:

* **Paragraph (d)(1) (Provision of Covered Equipment):** The offeror represents whether it "will" or "will not" provide covered telecommunications equipment or services to the Government in the performance of any contract, subcontract, or other contractual instrument resulting from the solicitation. In an AI hardware bid, selecting "will not" requires complete verification that all delivered edge accelerators, optical sensors, and network transceivers contain zero covered components.
* **Paragraph (d)(2) (Use of Covered Equipment):** The offeror represents whether it "does" or "does not" use covered telecommunications equipment or services, or use any equipment, system, or service that uses covered equipment or services. If the offeror uses Dahua or Hikvision security cameras within its corporate facilities or engineering labs, it must select "does" and provide extensive disclosures under paragraph (e)(2).

### Using Annual SAM.gov Representations Under FAR 52.204-26

Contractors complete annual Section 889 representations in the System for Award Management (SAM.gov) under FAR 52.204-26 (Covered Telecommunications Equipment or Services-Representation).

If a contractor has completed a comprehensive corporate audit and represented in SAM.gov that it does not provide (under paragraph (c)(1)) and does not use (under paragraph (c)(2)) covered equipment, the contractor can bypass detailed per-solicitation representations under FAR 52.204-24, provided its supply chain status has not changed. However, for complex Super Intelligence bids involving specialized edge hardware, contracting officers often mandate proposal-specific FAR 52.204-24 representations regardless of SAM.gov status.

### Mandatory Subcontractor Flow-Down Under FAR 52.204-25

FAR 52.204-25(e) requires prime contractors to flow down the substance of the clause, including paragraph (e), in all subcontracts and other contractual instruments, including subcontracts for the acquisition of commercial products or commercial services.

When building an AI system with hardware partners, sensor vendors, and data labeling providers, the prime contractor must:

1. Insert FAR 52.204-25 into every sub-tier contract and purchase order.
2. Require formal Section 889 compliance declarations from each hardware vendor before issuing subcontracts.
3. Establish contractual indemnification clauses protecting the prime contractor if a sub-tier vendor provides unauthorized covered silicon.

### Mandatory One-Day Reporting Obligations

Under FAR 52.204-25(d), if a contractor discovers covered telecommunications equipment or services during contract performance, the contractor must report the discovery in writing to the Contracting Officer within one business day.

The initial report must include:

* The contract number and task order number
* An itemized description of the covered equipment (brand, model number, serial number)
* The supplier or subcontractor name
* An explanation of the equipment's role in the system

Within 10 business days of the initial notification, the contractor must submit a detailed mitigation plan describing actions taken to prevent future use or delivery, and the efforts underway to remove and replace the non-compliant equipment.

## How to Organize Supply Chain Lineage and Procurement Records

Coordinating Section 889 compliance for federal Super Intelligence systems requires active collaboration across systems engineering, procurement, legal counsel, and proposal teams. When bidding on complex federal solicitations, teams must manage hundreds of component spec sheets, supplier declarations, teardown photos, and proposal volumes.

Disorganized file sharing and unversioned documentation create compliance vulnerabilities. If a hardware engineer updates a camera module specification to replace an unvetted sensor, but the proposal writer incorporates an older bill of materials into the final technical volume, the bid can face disqualification or post-award termination.

A federal capture team preparing an AI proposal needs a shared workspace where engineers, procurement specialists, and proposal managers can store bills of materials, supplier declarations, and technical specifications. Fastio provides org-owned workspaces with access granted per organization, workspace and share through member roles. Capture managers can give external hardware subcontractors a Receive share for their uploads without exposing internal cost volumes or strategic proposal documents.

Per-file version history tracks updates across hardware component specifications and supplier affidavits, keeping revisions auditable. If a supplier updates a component declaration or an engineering team revises a carrier board schematic, earlier versions remain fully accessible. A detailed activity log records every user and agent action, providing clear internal visibility into when compliance documents were uploaded, modified, or deleted.

When capture teams must process large volumes of technical data sheets, component declarations, and supplier forms, [Metadata Views](/product/document-data-extraction/) extract structured information directly from unstructured files. Teams define fields in natural language, such as chip manufacturer, part number, country of origin, and compliance status. The workspace automatically parses uploaded PDF specification sheets and populates a filterable, sortable view. Technical teams can filter instantly for unverified silicon components across an entire subsystem bill of materials.

Security architecture is foundational for procurement data. Fastio runs on infrastructure partners (Google Cloud Platform, Cloudflare) certified to industry security standards. Fastio protects workspace files with encryption in transit and at rest, scoped access controls, and a detailed activity log.

Maintaining structured supply chain records enables federal contractors to satisfy the reasonable inquiry standard under FAR 52.204-24 with verifiable evidence.

## Frequently asked questions

### How does NDAA Section 889 affect federal contractors delivering super intelligence or AI systems?

NDAA Section 889 prohibits federal contractors from delivering systems containing covered telecommunications equipment (Part A) or using covered equipment in their business operations (Part B). For contractors delivering artificial intelligence or Super Intelligence solutions under Executive Order 14434, this restriction bars hardware accelerators, edge vision processors, sensors, and network infrastructure produced by Huawei, ZTE, Hytera, Dahua, Hikvision, or their subsidiaries such as HiSilicon.

### What hardware components in AI systems are vulnerable to Section 889 prohibitions?

The most vulnerable hardware components in AI systems are edge computer vision cameras, optical sensor modules, and IoT inference gateways. Prohibited silicon, such as HiSilicon system-on-chip processors and neural processing units, is frequently embedded in white-labeled OEM camera modules, single-board computers, and cellular telemetry modems. Contractors must audit components down to the original chip manufacturer.

### What representations must contractors make under FAR 52.204-24 for super intelligence bids?

Under FAR 52.204-24, contractors must complete two representations based on a reasonable inquiry: paragraph (d)(1) requires certifying whether the contractor will or will not provide covered telecommunications equipment or services to the government; paragraph (d)(2) requires certifying whether the contractor does or does not use covered equipment or services across its enterprise operations.

### How does Executive Order 14434 change compliance obligations for federal AI contractors?

Executive Order 14434 directs executive branch agencies to use Super Intelligence (SI) in place of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in official correspondence, websites, and non-statutory documents. Section 3(a) anchors SI directly to the statutory definition of artificial intelligence in 15 U.S.C. 9401(3). Section 2(b) leaves existing contracts intact, and Section 4(c) creates no private rights. It introduces no directives for private commercial vendors, but contractors responding to federal solicitations must mirror agency terminology while verifying supply chain compliance under FAR 52.204-24.

### What constitutes a reasonable inquiry under FAR 52.204-24 for AI hardware supply chains?

FAR 52.204-24(a) defines a reasonable inquiry as an inquiry designed to uncover any information in the entity's possession about the identity of the producer or provider of covered telecommunications equipment or services. In an AI hardware context, this requires reviewing multi-tier bills of materials, collecting supplier compliance declarations, verifying original chip manufacturers, and screening components against the FCC Covered List and SAM.gov exclusions.

### What is the difference between federal Super Intelligence and research superintelligence?

Federal Super Intelligence (SI), written as two capitalized words, is an administrative term adopted under Executive Order 14434 for operational machine learning systems defined in 15 U.S.C. 9401(3). Research superintelligence (ASI), written as a single compound word in computer science research, refers to a theoretical future system exceeding human expert capabilities across virtually all domains. Operational federal SI systems exist today; research ASI does not exist.

## Sources

- [Cornell Law School: Legal Information Institute (15 U.S.C. 9401)](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/9401): Under 15 U.S.C. 9401(3), artificial intelligence is defined as a machine-based system that can, for a given set of human-defined objectives, make predictions, recommendations or decisions influencing real or virtual environments.
- [The White House: Executive Order 14434](https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/09/inaugurating-the-era-of-super-intelligence/): Under Executive Order 14434, the terms Super Intelligence and SI mean the technologies and systems encompassed by the term artificial intelligence as defined in section 9401(3) of title 15, United States Code.

## About Fast.io

Fast.io provides shared workspaces where people and AI agents work on the same files, with built-in semantic search and citation-backed chat over what they hold. Agents reach it through a remote MCP server, a REST API at https://api.fast.io/current/, and a command line client published on npm as @vividengine/fastio-cli. MCP setup is at https://mcp.fast.io/docs: Claude and most MCP clients connect to https://mcp.fast.io/mcp/tools, ChatGPT to https://mcp.fast.io/mcp/operations, and coding agents to https://mcp.fast.io/mcp/code.