Independent resource · Not affiliated with HarnessRouter · Last verified 15 Aug 2026
Comparison

UHP vs Harness Protocol

These similarly named projects solve different portability problems: UHP standardizes runtime execution, while Harness Protocol standardizes portable harness configuration.

Verified: Protocol: 2026-08-11No executable JS

Two different projects

Unified Harness Protocol (UHP) is initiated and led by HarnessRouter. Its primary contract is a common HTTP execution surface between a client and a server that drives complete harnesses.

Harness Protocol is a separate open specification centered on a vendor-neutral harness.yaml profile. Its current Schema layer captures operational configuration such as plugins, skills, MCP servers, environment requirements, instructions and permissions.

QuestionUHPHarness Protocol
What is portable?How a client executes work through harnessesHow harness configuration is represented
Primary artifactHTTP API + object/event semanticsharness.yaml profile and schema
Runtime lifecycle?Yes: tasks, sessions, files, streaming, cancellationNot its primary v1 purpose
Configuration portability?Configured harness object exists, but UHP is not a portable YAML profile standardYes, this is the core problem
Could they coexist?Conceptually yes: a portable profile could configure a runtime that is then driven through an execution protocol.

Why this matters

“Harness interoperability” is not a single problem. Teams may need portable configuration, runtime execution, tool connectivity, policy supervision and cross-agent communication. A useful architecture chooses a standard for each boundary rather than expecting one protocol to own the entire stack.

Status as of 15 August 2026

UHP's published protocol version is 2026-08-11. Harness Protocol describes its v1 Schema layer as a candidate/current layer, with Exchange and Registry layers planned or drafted beyond it. Treat the two projects as independent unless their maintainers announce explicit interoperability.

Primary sources