Provider Surfaces

A provider surface is a brand plus the specific place AxiOwl talks to.

Examples:

• codex:agents
• codex:cli
• cursor:agents
• vscode:agents
• copilot:vsix extension
• claude-code:cli

Why Brand Name Is Not Enough

“Codex works” is not precise enough. Codex agents and Codex CLI use different mechanics. “Cursor works” is not precise enough. Cursor Agent Window and a hypothetical Cursor CLI would be different surfaces.

Plain English version: the app name is not the whole address. The surface matters.

Surface Differences

Surface	Typical requirements
Agent window	Bridge, session discovery, MCP, sometimes patch.
Editor chat	Extension, workspace/session ownership, MCP config.
CLI	Executable discovery, auth, cwd, session files, MCP config, metadata.
VSIX extension	Extension install, host APIs, MCP server definition.
Remote node	Network/node contract and separate trust boundary.

Why AxiOwl Separates Them

Separating surfaces keeps the installer honest and the tests meaningful. A passing VS Code test should not mark Copilot CLI supported. A passing Cursor agent test should not imply any other Cursor surface exists.

This is also part of normalization. AxiOwl normalizes provider surfaces into a shared naming model, but it does not collapse different surfaces into one vague brand label.