0742f78357* docs: replace the markdown bug template with issue forms (#1844) Issues are the only intake channel now that external pull requests are off (#1820), so the chooser is where the contribution policy has to be stated — GitHub gives a would-be contributor no explanation when the "New pull request" button isn't there. The one existing template was a legacy **markdown** template, whose fields are prose headings a reporter can delete or ignore. Most reports still arrive missing the client and the transport, which are the two facts that decide where to look. Issue forms enforce them: this replaces `bug_report.md` with `1-bug_report.yml`, where client (web/cli/tui/core), version line (v1/v2), Inspector version, Node version, transport, MCP server, repro, expected, and actual are all `validations.required`. It auto-labels `bug`, and its intro says maintainers implement the fix, so a prompt plus screenshots beats a diff — with a field for exactly that. Adds `2-feature_request.yml` (auto-labels `enhancement`), which puts the problem statement first and marks the solution optional, since the problem is what survives when a specific solution turns out not to fit. Neither form applies a `v1`/`v2` label: GitHub can't map a form answer to a label, so the version line is a required dropdown and a maintainer still labels at triage. v1 takes security fixes only, so routing that answer early is the point. `config.yml` disables blank issues and carries the contact links. **There is deliberately no security *template*** — a template still opens a public issue, which is precisely what a vulnerability report must not do. The redirect is a contact link straight to the private advisory form (`/security/advisories/new`, verified enabled on this repo) plus one to `SECURITY.md`, which covers the v1 line too. The remaining links deflect the recurring misfiled classes: the specification repo and the TypeScript SDK for reports that aren't about this tool, the docs site, the contribution policy, and `#inspector-dev`. Also fixes three links the #1884 rename left dangling — `SECURITY.md` and the PR template still pointed at `CONTRIBUTORS.md`, which no longer exists on this branch. A policy nobody can open is the same as no policy. Validated against GitHub's issue-forms schema (unique ids, allowed `type`s, `markdown` blocks carrying no `id`/`validations`, `checkboxes` marking `required` per option rather than under `validations`). Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01YAt8rqxysNbhYWLhoRm3fU Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * docs: address Copilot review on the issue forms (#1844) - PR template said `v2` targets `main`; the v2 base branch is `v2/main`. Correct on its face, and the one line in that template a reader acts on. - Scoped the Node floor on the bug form to v2, since the form serves both lines and v1's floor is older — reading `>= 22.19.0` as universal would make a legitimate v1 report look out of support. - Both the CONTRIBUTING.md paragraph and the AGENTS.md section now say the chooser is served from the **default branch**, so neither claims a form added on `v2/main` is live before the milestone merge. * docs: re-wrap the CONTRIBUTING chooser paragraph (#1844) Round-2 Copilot nit: the previous wrap left a dangling "The" at end of line, splitting a phrase mid-sentence in the raw markdown. Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01YAt8rqxysNbhYWLhoRm3fU Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * docs: clarify the protocol-era prompt on the bug form (#1844) Round-3 Copilot nit. "the protocol era (legacy / modern) if you selected one" reads as referring to a field on this form, which has none — the era is selected on the *connection*, in the Inspector's server settings. Reworded to "the protocol era you connected with (auto / legacy / modern)", which also picks up `auto`, the default the previous list omitted. Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01YAt8rqxysNbhYWLhoRm3fU Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * docs: stop describing the feature form as sharing the bug form's fields (#1844) Round-4 Copilot nits, and it was right three times over — I had described "client, version line, transport" as the required set for *both* forms in CONTRIBUTING.md, AGENTS.md, and the config.yml header. The feature form has neither a version-line dropdown nor a transport field, and cannot have the first: v1 takes security fixes only, so a feature request is v2 by construction. Each of the three now distinguishes the two forms rather than generalizing from the bug form. Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01YAt8rqxysNbhYWLhoRm3fU Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * feat: declare v2 statically on the feature form (#1844) Round-5 Copilot nit caught a real contradiction: the AGENTS.md paragraph said no form can apply a version label, then asserted the feature form "is always labeled v2". Both halves can't be true. Resolved in the direction that makes the claim true rather than softer. A form's `labels:` is static, which is only an obstacle when the value depends on a reporter's answer — and for the feature form it doesn't: v1 takes security fixes only, so a feature request is v2 by construction. So it now declares `["enhancement", "v2"]` outright, which also satisfies AGENTS.md's label-at-create-time rule without a triage step. The bug form still can't, and shouldn't: its version line is genuinely the reporter's to answer. Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01YAt8rqxysNbhYWLhoRm3fU Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
1.5 KiB
1.5 KiB
Heads up: this repository accepts issues, not pull requests from external contributors. Please read
CONTRIBUTING.mdbefore continuing. If you're an external contributor, open an issue (and share the prompt you used, if you've already built the change) rather than this PR.Want to work on the Inspector with us directly? Come say hello in
#inspector-devon the MCP Contributor Discord — we're happy to scope work with you.