- Phase 30 launch plan (chrome-devtools-mcp-seo-brief.md, blog post) - SEO keyword brief (keywords.md with P0/P1 locked keywords) - Cognee workspace isolation eval + architecture deep-dive Co-Authored-By: PM <pm@agents.moleculesai.app>
1.8 KiB
Cognee Workspace Isolation Evaluation
Date: 2026-04-20 Issue: Molecule-AI/molecule-core#1146 Status: Preliminary — needs deeper architecture review
Summary
Cognee (Apache-2.0, by Topoteretes UG) is an open-source AI memory engine with a shipped MCP component. It has direct overlap with Molecule AI's Phase 9 hierarchical memory architecture.
Workspace Isolation Assessment
Signal: Partial/Positive
Cognee's GitHub README explicitly lists "agentic user/tenant isolation, traceability, OTEL collector, audit traits" as a core architectural feature.
This is a positive signal. However:
- The README mention does not specify the technical mechanism (namespace-level separation? separate vector DB instances per tenant? row-level security in a shared DB?)
- The cognee-mcp MCP component's handling of multi-workspace contexts is not documented in the surface-level readme
Verdict: Cognee claims tenant isolation. Further due diligence required before treating this as confirmed.
Next Steps
- Deep-dive into cognee architecture docs — check if isolation is enforced at the storage layer (separate DB/collection per workspace), application layer (row-level), or both
- Test cognee-mcp with a multi-workspace scenario — the MCP tool interface should reveal whether workspace_id is a first-class parameter
- Check cognee's GitHub issues/discussions — any community reports of cross-tenant data leakage?
- Evaluate migration path — if Cognee is adopted, what's involved in migrating existing Phase 9 work?
Recommendation
Proceed with Phase 9 build-vs-buy review. Cognee is a credible candidate — isolation is claimed but mechanism needs verification. The Phase 9 halt stands until this is resolved.
Sources
- https://github.com/topoteretes/cognee (README, 2026-04-20)
- /workspace/repo/research/cognee-memo.md