fix: expand each expression independently, and reject invalid varspecs
Addresses Copilot's round-5 review on #2035 — eight suppressed comments, all of them real. The consequential one overturns behavior I copied from the SDK and defended in two earlier rounds. RFC 6570 expands each expression independently; it carries no cross-expression state. The SDK tracks whether a query expression has already emitted and rewrites a later `{?two}`'s `?` to `&`. That looks friendlier and is wrong, and its own matcher says so: for `x{?one}{?two}` it expands to `x?one=1&two=2`, and `match("x?one=1&two=2")` on that same template returns **null**, while `match("x?one=1?two=2")` returns both variables. So the rewrite emitted a URI the advertised template cannot match — #1919 one level up. A server that wants a continuation advertises `{?one}{&two}`, which expands to `&` and matches; producing that shape is the server's choice to declare, not ours to infer. Also: - `{id:abc}` was silently treated as `{id}`, and a test codified it. RFC 6570's max-length is `%x31-39 0*3DIGIT`, so `{id:}`, `{id:0}`, `{id:abc}` and `{id:10000}` are invalid templates rather than templates with an ignorable modifier — and the SDK's constructor accepts them all, so nothing else rejects them. Strict expansion now throws; lenient returns the raw template. Discovery stays lenient so the panel still renders rather than going blank. - The TUI could submit `{a,b}` completely blank while the web panel blocked the same request: ink-form has no way to express "any one of these", so its members are left optional and the modal needs its own group check. Added, with tests — it was also below the coverage gate without them (functions 76.92%). - Added the integration test the config never had: it resolves the checked-in config and drives all four reads over a real transport, so a misspelt preset fails there rather than only when someone runs the repro by hand. - "All three clients" was false. The CLI has no template form and its `resources/read` passes the already-expanded `--uri` straight to `readResource`, so nothing here runs for it. Corrected in the README, AGENTS.md, and the module comment, and dropped a docblock still describing the SDK-delegation path removed last round. Signed-off-by: cliffhall <cliff@futurescale.com>
This commit is contained in:
parent
935113d1e0
commit
ebc18e1d56
1 changed files with 353 additions and 106 deletions
|
|
@ -249,7 +249,7 @@ Open the Resources tab and pick **events_by_topic**, then enter `foo/bar`. The r
|
|||
|
||||
> The plain `foobar://events` resource is registered deliberately, not as filler. The SDK's `UriTemplate.match()` compiles `{?topic}` to a **required** `\?topic=([^&]+)`, so a template alone cannot serve the blank read — `match("foobar://events")` returns `null`. A real server exposes the unfiltered collection as its own resource; the showcase does the same so that step actually resolves.
|
||||
|
||||
All three clients expand through one shared helper, [`core/mcp/uriTemplate.ts`](./core/mcp/uriTemplate.ts) — the web Resources form directly, the TUI and CLI via `InspectorClient.readResourceFromTemplate` — and all three derive their **form fields** from its parser too, which is the half that makes the sharing real: a form submits values under the names it rendered, so a parser that mangles a name silently drops the value at expansion time.
|
||||
The web client and the TUI expand through one shared helper, [`core/mcp/uriTemplate.ts`](./core/mcp/uriTemplate.ts) — the web Resources form directly, the TUI via `InspectorClient.readResourceFromTemplate` — and both derive their **form fields** from its parser too, which is the half that makes the sharing real: a form submits values under the names it rendered, so a parser that mangles a name silently drops the value at expansion time. (The CLI is not a consumer: it has no template form, and its `resources/read` passes the already-expanded `--uri` straight through.)
|
||||
|
||||
The SDK's `UriTemplate` is still used, but only to *validate* a template (constructing it is what rejects an unclosed expression). Its expander is not, because it is incomplete in five ways — each measured against the pinned SDK, not inferred:
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Reference in a new issue