-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
feat: add mcp clients #8
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
Conversation
"title": "Claude Desktop", | ||
"url": "https://claude.ai/download", | ||
"protocolVersion": "2024-11-05", | ||
"claude-ai": { |
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.
Pls can we keep these in alphabetical order? Maybe the npm build
script could reshuffle the file
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.
Lets run that in check.yml
workflow and if the clients are not sorted it will fail and user will need to run npm run sort
locally and commit the correctly sorted version. I think we can somehow block the merge unless it is sorted.
we strongly recommend the MCP clients to use a new client name to avoid confusing the servers | ||
and provide the best user and agent experience. | ||
|
||
### Clients supported |
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.
This is interesting - how about we generate this table from the JSON file automatically using the build command? I'd keep the same columns as https://modelcontextprotocol.io/clients#feature-support-matrix
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 idea 👍
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.
Once we have a sufficient coverage, I think they might adopt our package too rather than having to maintain the table themselves
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.
done - we are using the npm run generate-table
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.
I would add this to the PR body template checklist and run that on release when updating changelog.
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.
lets just keep that in the check workflow that runs on each PR (it will fail if not updated) - that will be simpler
No description provided.