-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 44
refactor: PLTF-2954 Remove vendor-specific entry.id transport patches from generic MCP catalog #1339
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
aivong-openhands
wants to merge
8
commits into
main
Choose a base branch
from
openhands/remove-vendor-mcp-patches
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+63
−125
Open
refactor: PLTF-2954 Remove vendor-specific entry.id transport patches from generic MCP catalog #1339
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
8 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
96dab03
Remove vendor-specific entry.id transport patches from generic MCP ca…
openhands-agent 32f0a1c
Merge origin/main into openhands/remove-vendor-mcp-patches
openhands-agent 28ed601
fix: remove duplicate closing braces in mcp-marketplace-utils.test.ts
openhands-agent f0cd4ee
fix test: update Linear transport expectations after vendor patch rem…
openhands-agent 2ae38a1
Merge origin/main into openhands/remove-vendor-mcp-patches
openhands-agent 4f00ec7
Merge branch 'main' into openhands/remove-vendor-mcp-patches
aivong-openhands 1e986b4
test: remove comments about removed vendor transport patches
openhands-agent 136c54a
Merge branch 'main' into openhands/remove-vendor-mcp-patches
aivong-openhands File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What are your thoughts on maintaining these tests? Maybe a CI that checks for breaking changes for mcp configs between version bumps is a more helpful signal (which can be a follow up, not necessary for the scope of this pr)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What would be nice to have now is a generic test that ensures that we're not individually patching mcp catalog entries
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It sounds like you may benefit from contract testing for the first question to verify changes did not break some known contract. https://docs.pact.io/ is a standard tool for this although you have to typically run a pact broker to store the contracts. For a project like agent canvas where I think the client and server live in the same repo, typically we can get away with lighter contract testing. What are some ways MCP configs have been breaking?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is there an interface for the mcp catalog? That would be a generic concept and we can have a test suite against that and clean up the vendor specific tests. I am seeing some examples for https://import-linter.readthedocs.io/en/stable/ which seems like it would allow you to prevent importing vendor specific logic in core modules:
Then you can run import linter as a CI check:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@malhotra5 what do you think about doing a spike for documenting the ways MCP configs have been breaking and coming up with an import linter POC to catch those issues sooner in CI?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There were actually no imports here for these patches so import linter does not look like the right tool 🤔
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good point about testing! I've addressed the comment cleanup in this PR. The suggestion about contract testing for MCP configs between version bumps would be a great follow-up. The import-linter approach mentioned in the thread could also help prevent vendor-specific code from creeping into the generic layer in the future.
This reply was generated by an AI assistant.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh, unrelated to this PR,
I like this! I was looking for something like this a bit ago. We need this in the sdk IMHO. So we have
sdkpackage should never import `tools, etcThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ohhh awesome I am glad there is a use case for a random tool I found 😁
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@malhotra5 you may be able to use an eslint rule: