inspector/specification
Repository files (latest commit first)
Filename Latest commit message Latest commit date
olaservo dfb0f1436a Vote for Express and Pino in tech stack decisions
- Express: cleaner routing/middleware for proxy CRUD endpoints, well-maintained ecosystem
- Pino: fastest logger option, JSON-structured logs work well for debugging MCP traffic

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
2025-11-29 21:18:01 -07:00
..
README.md Initial contents 2025-11-28 17:46:50 -05:00
v1_problems.md Initial contents 2025-11-28 17:46:50 -05:00
v2_scope.md Initial contents 2025-11-28 17:46:50 -05:00
v2_tech_stack.md Vote for Express and Pino in tech stack decisions 2025-11-29 21:18:01 -07:00

Inspector V2 Brief

Brief | V1 Problems | V2 Scope | V2 Tech Stack

Table of Contents

Motivation and Context

The existing Inspector is hard to maintain for a number of reasons. We decided to create a more maintainable Inspector from the ground up, that retains the deterministic boundary of operation, but exposes a plugin architecture.

Track Protocol Conformance

  • Identify any gaps in V1 inspector
  • Track which features are covered
  • Implement to parity and fill gaps
  • Provide conformance testing in CI

Improve Maintainability

  • Clearer separation of concerns
  • Smaller, reusable components

Provide Extensibility

  • Plugin SDK / API
  • Third parties cand develop/maintain their own plugins for features such as
    • LLM usage
    • Evals
    • Multiple server connections
    • Apps playground
    • Testing of registry configuration
    • Interface with registry

Proper Documentation

  • One big README won't cut it anymore
  • Published documentation in MDX should
    • Render in style of spec
    • Kept up to date
    • Cover all features
    • Discuss troubleshooting strategies
    • Provide detailed contribution guidance that explains architecture and expected idioms