Through v1 the Inspector was a follow-along project — the spec moved, we
chased it, and whatever planning capacity was left went to keeping up rather
than to the tool's own design. v2 meeting the 2026-07-28 spec across all three
clients lifts that constraint, but nothing written down said so, and there was
no shared list of what the MCP roadmap is likely to demand of us next.
Add docs/inspector-roadmap-2026-h2.md covering 2026-08-11 → 2027-02-11 (~26
weekly milestones, v2.2.0 → ~v2.27.0), in two explicitly-budgeted tracks.
Track A predicts Inspector features per MCP roadmap theme and WG charter,
each tagged build-now / design-now-build-on-signal / watch, so a speculative
item gets a liaison rather than code: transports and session lifecycle, Server
Cards (SEP-2127), Tasks retry/expiry and the extension→core migration,
enterprise audit + ID-JAG, triggers/events, result types, interceptors
(SEP-1763), file inputs (SEP-2356), skills (SEP-2640), primitive grouping,
and conformance.
Track B is the work we choose, headlined by the zoomable protocol/network
timeline — lanes, spans rather than points, brush-to-filter, MRTR and task
grouping — then session record/replay, a shared diff primitive, a command
palette, saved-call collections feeding CI assertions, the argument-editor
workstream, and Connection Doctor.
The sequencing argument is that several Track B items are force multipliers
for Track A: each protocol feature arrives with a rendering problem, and one
general timeline plus one general diff is cheaper than a bespoke panel per
SEP. So the general surfaces come first and the SEP work renders into them.
Two consolidations the survey surfaced, both worth acting on regardless of
whether this plan is adopted as written:
- #1853, #1856, #1885, #1928, #1919 and #1910 are one defect class, not six
bugs — the argument editor is not schema-aware. Treating them separately
has already produced one regression from v1.x (#1928).
- #962, #1936, #1951, #1944 and #1914 are one missing feature: an ordered
diagnostic that reports which connection step failed and what to do.
Sourcing is the published roadmap plus the nine WG and six IG charters, cited
in full at the end; the doc says so, and flags that Track A should be revised
if internal planning carries themes the public page omits. Status is "Draft
for WG review" — merging this starts the discussion rather than settling it.
Adds one file and touches nothing else. The README guide list and the
AGENTS.md docs/ tree entry are deliberately left for a follow-up rather than
bundled here, to keep this diff to the document itself. Markdown-only, and
outside every format and typecheck glob (SOURCE_EXTENSIONS has no "md"), so
no gate is affected.
Closes#1980
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_013CaLPZQzfWDHoPxyL1vbYL
Signed-off-by: cliffhall <cliff@futurescale.com>
bb599e5057