[LoopGlitch26]

Motivation & Context

I maintain Tracekit (MIT, https://github.com/Cygnux-Labs/Tracekit). This PR adds it to the Python catalog in a new Middleware section. Middleware is one of the catalog's allowed sections and has no entries yet.

The integration is published for the Python SDK. tracekit.integrations.agent_framework.Tracekit ships in tracekit-ai 1.3.0 on PyPI and subclasses FunctionMiddleware. Its process asks a Tracekit signer for a decision before the function runs. A refused call never reaches call_next: the refusal becomes the call's result, so the model reads it. After the call it records the result. The row links to the integration guide (https://github.com/Cygnux-Labs/Tracekit/blob/main/docs/integrations/microsoft-agent-framework.md), and issues go to https://github.com/Cygnux-Labs/Tracekit/issues/new/choose.

The integration is new in 1.3.0. I tested it with agent-framework-core 1.22.0, using the repository's offline example against the released packages. A scripted chat client asks for three shell commands: ls ran, sudo rm -rf / was refused without running and the model read the reason, and a held command ran once it was approved from a second process. To check it in a minute with no API key: clone the repository, pip install tracekit-ai "agent-framework-core>=1.22,<1.23", then run python examples/v2/agent_framework/agent.py --scripted.

Description & Review Guide

• What are the major changes? A Middleware section in python/samples/community-projects.md with one row, after Context providers as the catalog's section order says.
• What is the impact of these changes? Documentation only.
• What do you want reviewers to focus on? The wording of the row. I'm happy to change it or the placement.

Related Issue

N/A - trivial change: one catalog row in the format the catalog criteria define, no code.

AI Assistance

• No material AI assistance was used.
• This is an AI-assisted contribution. I reviewed, understood, and verified all submitted content and accept responsibility for it.

AI assistance details: the catalog row and this description were drafted with AI assistance; I reviewed and tested it.

Contribution Checklist

• The code builds clean without any errors or warnings
• All unit tests pass, and I have added new tests where possible
• The PR follows the Contribution Guidelines
• This PR links to an agreed issue with no competing open PR, or the Related Issue section documents a trivial-change or repository-automation exception.
• This is not a breaking change. If it is a breaking change, add the breaking change label (or add "[BREAKING]" to the title prefix, before or after any language prefix) — a workflow keeps the label and title prefix in sync automatically.

[Copilot]

Copilot was unable to review this pull request because the user who requested the review has reached their quota limit.

[Eduard van Valkenburg (eavanvalkenburg)]

The submission meets the community catalog requirements: it documents a published Python-specific middleware integration, uses the required table shape and neutral wording, provides project-specific/direct issue links, and the repository Markdown link check passes.