How to find and name fak: search terms and disambiguation
TL;DR: the bare word fak is dominated by homophone and F.A.K.-acronym noise, so a plain search for it will not find this project. Pair it with a disambiguated term — agent kernel, Fused Agent Kernel, or the slogan “treat the tool call like a syscall” — and give advocates those terms so word-of-mouth lands on findable language. A concept people cannot find is a concept that cannot spread.
This is dimension I — Memorable framing & naming of the
concept-popularization epic.
It serves three core concepts — treat the tool call like a syscall, one static
Go binary, and drop-in — by making the language used to reach them consistent.
The disambiguated terms below are the same ones the machine-facing answer-engine
surface uses (see llms.txt), so human word-of-mouth and machine
discovery point at the same names.
The problem: the bare word does not resolve
fak is short, spoken, and collides. A raw search is drowned by:
- the homophone (an expletive and its many spellings),
- the F.A.K. acronym (first-aid kit, and dozens of unrelated initialisms),
- generic typo-noise.
So the rule is simple: never ship the bare word alone. Always pair it with one of the disambiguated terms below.
The terms to use (pair fak with one of these)
These are the canonical search + reference terms, drawn from
llms.txt:
| Term | Use it when you mean |
|---|---|
fak agent kernel |
the whole thing — the primary handle |
fused agent kernel |
the expanded product name when fak alone is too ambiguous |
treat the tool call like a syscall |
the one-line mental model / slogan |
fak serve |
the gateway verb (the runnable surface) |
fak guard |
the one-command wrapper for an agent you already run |
long-session prompt cache |
the cost/reuse framing |
model routing for agents |
the per-call routing framing |
MCP tool-call boundary |
the MCP/adjudication framing |
vendor-neutral inference backend |
the interop/serving-boundary framing |
bring-your-accelerator agent serving |
the hardware-portability framing |
neo-silicon agent kernel |
the chip-vendor / backend-author angle |
fak backend conformance, fak-certified backend |
the conformance mark |
The one canonical name to lead with: fak, the Fused Agent Kernel — an agent kernel for AI agent loops.
What category is this? (so people search the right shelf)
fak is on these shelves — say the category, then the name:
- agent kernel
- AI agent runtime boundary
- cache-efficient agent serving
- per-call model routing
- result quarantine for agent tools
- addressable KV cache
What fak is not (disambiguation from adjacent things)
Advocates lose the concept when a listener rounds it to the nearest familiar thing. Draw these lines:
- Not a network firewall or a WAF. The boundary is the tool call (a syscall), not a network packet. “Firewall” is only an analogy for one policy posture, not the product category to lead with.
- Not a prompt-injection classifier / guardrails library. The load-bearing floor is the capability lock (a tool off the allow-list cannot be called), not a recognizer that tries to spot bad text. The result detector is ~100% evadable by design — a bonus, never the floor.
- Not a token-serving engine. fak does not replace vLLM, SGLang, or llama.cpp; it fronts one, owning the agent boundary (capability, quarantine, audit, routing, reuse legality). Use a tuned engine for raw tokens/sec.
- Not a request-level model router (OpenRouter / Portkey / LiteLLM). fak complements them: it governs the tool-call boundary and routes per aspect.
- Not a hosted SaaS. It is one static Go binary you run yourself.
Give advocates the language
When you talk about fak, hand people a term they can search back to:
- Say: “It’s an agent kernel — it treats every tool call like a syscall.”
- Not: “It’s called fak” (they will never find it).
- In writing, link the name: fak, the Fused Agent Kernel.
Honest scope
No market-adoption claim is made here. fak’s contribution is the assembly of established primitives into one in-process gate — a 29-claim prior-art audit scored 0/29 novel, so this note claims a clear name, not a novel invention.
Verify
test -f docs/adoption/naming.md # this artifact exists
fak score seo # new doc does not red the SEO scorecard