<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
Resolve https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry/issues/768 and
https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry/issues/494.
Require HTTPS for remote URLs. Currently all remote URLs on the MCP
Registry are HTTPS.
Also fix a test bug when running on Windows (bad temp path).
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
Unit tests.
Published a server.json locally with a website URL not matching the
server name.
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [x] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [x] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [x] New and existing tests pass locally
- [x] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] ~I have added or updated documentation as needed~ N/A
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
## Summary
Adds a clean, minimal web interface at `/` for browsing MCP servers in
the registry. Built as a single self-contained HTML file embedded in the
Go binary.
## Features
- Responsive grid layout (1/2/3 columns based on screen size)
- Search servers by name
- Filter to show only latest versions (default on)
- "Recently Updated" section for servers updated in the last hour
- Expandable cards with full server metadata and JSON viewer
- Debug modal to switch between production/staging/local/custom API
endpoints
- Full URL parameter support and browser history navigation
## Implementation
- Single HTML file (~400 lines) with Tailwind CSS via CDN
- Zero build dependencies
- Embedded using `//go:embed`
- Served directly from router at root path
- Uses stable v0.1 API endpoints
Fixes#99
---
AI disclosure: this is 99% vibed with Claude. It's intended as a v0 to
get something up and working, and then maybe at a later date we can
replace it with something more real.
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
The Repository field in ServerJSON was not properly omitting empty
values
when marshaling to JSON. Even when a server had no repository
configured,
the JSON would include `"repository": {"url": "", "source": ""}` due to:
1. Repository struct fields (URL, Source) lacking omitempty tags
2. Repository being a value type instead of pointer in ServerJSON
This caused validation warnings for servers without repository URLs.
Changes:
- Add omitempty tags to Repository.URL and Repository.Source fields
- Change ServerJSON.Repository from model.Repository to
*model.Repository
- Update validateRepository to handle nil pointers
- Update all code creating Repository instances to use pointers
Now, servers without repository information correctly omit the field
entirely from JSON output, eliminating spurious validation warnings.
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
The following PR:
* Deprecates the existing OCI reference parser
* Deprecates the existing OCI way of authenticating and accessing the
image manifest
* Replaces the above by leveraging go-containerregistry
* Introduces support for Google Artifact Registry
* Enables us to easily add support for other OCI-compliant registries in
the future
* Introduces better error handling
* Introduces custom context timeouts for validation
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
Related to #427
---------
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
Fixes#710
This PR adds CORS middleware to enable browser-based clients and web
applications to access the registry API.
## Changes
- Add CORSMiddleware in internal/api/cors.go to handle preflight OPTIONS
requests and inject CORS headers
- Integrate CORS middleware into the server middleware stack
- Add CORS configuration options (CORS_ENABLED and CORS_ALLOWED_ORIGIN)
## Testing
- All existing tests pass
- Manual testing confirms CORS headers are present in responses
- OPTIONS preflight requests now return 204 with proper headers
## Configuration
New environment variables:
- MCP_REGISTRY_CORS_ENABLED (default: true)
- MCP_REGISTRY_CORS_ALLOWED_ORIGIN (default: *)
## Motivation and Context
See
https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry/issues/482#issuecomment-3436993157
for full details.
This adds ECDSA P-384 (a popular NIST approved curve) in addition to
Ed25519.
## How Has This Been Tested?
I have tested with a local deployment against `mcp.joelverhagen.com`.
Also, I have added significant tests.
## Breaking Changes
None. (hopefully)
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [x] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [x] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [x] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [x] New and existing tests pass locally
- [x] I have added appropriate error handling
- [x] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
@domdomegg and I spoke a bit about this on Discord:
https://discord.com/channels/1358869848138059966/1369487942862504016/1423710918180606052
---------
Co-authored-by: adam jones <domdomegg+git@gmail.com>
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
The following PR:
* Makes mcpb package version property optional
* Bumps the schema and reflects that in the code
* Makes sure the publisher tests are being covered by doing `make check`
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
---------
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
Enhanced Go struct tags throughout `pkg/api/v0/types.go` and
`pkg/model/types.go` to better align with the OpenAPI specification.
## Changes
- Added comprehensive `doc` tags with detailed field descriptions
matching OpenAPI
- Added `example` tags showing valid values for fields (e.g.,
`"io.github.user/weather"`, `"npx"`)
- Added `format` tags (`uri`, `date-time`) for better type specification
- Added `pattern` and `enum` tags for validation constraints
- Added `placeholder` field to `Input` struct matching OpenAPI spec
- Removed redundant comments in favor of inline struct tags
These changes improve code clarity and make the types more
self-documenting, while maintaining compatibility with the OpenAPI
schema definitions in `docs/reference/api/openapi.yaml`.
---------
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
The following PR introduces a `/version` API that serves the build
details along with the version of the API server being served. The
`/version` endpoint allows users to programmatically query which exact
version of the registry is running in production for debugging.
~~auditing, and compatibility checks~~.
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
The following PR fixes an issue we introduced on September, 30th that
caused some of the migrations to not apply. This PR fixes it. After
merging we'll have to reset staging as this would not work there (this
is expected).
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [x] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
The following PR addresses the feedback from #634 around:
* Use a proper library - https://github.com/distribution/reference,
instead of the implementing the OCI parsing ourselves (note: left the
tests so we can ensure we are not breaking any existing behavior)
* Updating one of the error messages to now assume MCPB.
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
Follow up from #658 addressing the feedback from @tadasant
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
The following PR adds a new v0.1 API version.
The goal is to mark v0.1 as a "freeze" point while keeping v0 as the
moving target for new features so integrators can start building on top
of something stable(r).
Details:
* This change is quite simple - we re-register the same handlers twice,
once as `v0` and once as `v0.1`
* Going forward, we'll keep v0.1 frozen while we add changes either on
top of both (non-breaking) or we'll have to branch if breaking changes
are necessary
* We all acknowledge this is not exactly best-practice, but it gives us
a way to gather feedback and allow clients to start integrating with the
API without breaking them (**note** this implies a follow up PR that
would branch the handlers used in v0.1).
* For integrators/clients: please provide your feedback - what works
well, what doesn't so we can take this into account going towards GA.
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
No, this just adds a new API version alongside the existing one.
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
Fixes: #649
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
Implements icon support based on the Model Context Protocol
specification, allowing servers to specify display icons with optional
size, MIME type, and theme variants.
## Changes
- Add `Icon` type to `pkg/model/types.go` with struct tags for automatic
API validation
- Add `icons` field to `ServerJSON` in `pkg/api/v0/types.go`
- Add icon validation in `internal/validators/validators.go`:
- Only HTTPS URLs allowed (no HTTP or data URIs)
- Maximum URL length of 255 characters
- Validates absolute URLs with proper scheme
- Update JSON schema and OpenAPI documentation with Icon definitions
- Add comprehensive test cases for icon validation
- Add example icon to seed.json (Airtable server)
- Change `websiteUrl` validation to HTTPS-only for consistency
## Implementation Details
The implementation uses a two-layer validation architecture:
1. **Huma framework** validates struct tags (`required`, `maxLength`,
`enum`, `pattern`) and returns 422 for violations
2. **Custom validators** handle business logic (HTTPS scheme
requirement, absolute URL requirement) and return 400 for violations
This approach leverages Huma's automatic validation while keeping
business-specific rules in the validator layer.
## Icon Field Specification
- `src` (required): HTTPS URL to icon resource, max 255 characters
- `mimeType` (optional): One of `image/png`, `image/jpeg`, `image/jpg`,
`image/svg+xml`, `image/webp`
- `sizes` (optional): Array of size strings in "WxH" format or "any" for
scalable formats
- `theme` (optional): Either "light" or "dark" to indicate intended
background
Multiple icons can be provided (e.g., for different themes or sizes).
Remove redundant endpoint as suggested in #617. Clients should now use
`GET /v0/servers/{serverName}/versions/latest` instead (using `latest`
as a special version value in the existing endpoint).
This simplifies the API surface and reduces implementation burden for
subregistries, while maintaining a clear migration path for consumers.
## Changes
- Removed `GET /v0/servers/{serverName}` endpoint
- Updated `GET /v0/servers/{serverName}/versions/{version}` to accept
`latest` as special version
- Updated all tests to use new endpoint pattern
- Updated documentation and OpenAPI spec
- Added breaking change notice to CHANGELOG
Fixes#617
Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Summary
Introduces a new optional `title` field for MCP servers to provide a
clean, human-readable display name that clients and subregistries can
use for display purposes.
Fixes#606
## Changes
- Added `title` field to `ServerJSON` type (optional, max 100 chars)
- Added validation to reject titles ending with 'MCP Server', 'MCP
server', or 'MCP' suffixes
- Updated JSON schema and OpenAPI specification
- Added comprehensive test coverage for title validation
- Updated all documentation examples to demonstrate the new field
## Validation
The title field:
- Is optional (can be omitted)
- Must not be only whitespace if provided
- Must not end with MCP-related suffixes (case-insensitive)
- Can contain 'MCP' in the middle (e.g., "MCP Weather API" is valid)
Examples:
- ✅ Valid: "GitHub", "Weather API", "Slack Integration"
- ❌ Invalid: "GitHub MCP", "Weather MCP Server", "Slack-MCP"
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
The following PR:
* Enforces schema validation on the API level (requests without schema
or older schema will fail)
* Updates the unit tests and examples to match that
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
**Note this can be considered breaking if clients have not included it
before.**
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
---------
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
## Summary
Fixes staging deployment by renumbering migrations to match what staging
has already applied.
## Problem
Staging already applied migration 008 (metadata separation) before we
inserted the new cleanup migration. When we added the cleanup as 008 and
renumbered metadata to 009, staging tried to apply 009 again and failed
with "column already exists".
## Current State
- **Staging**: Has run original 008 (metadata separation), marked as
complete. Failed trying to run 009 (which is the same migration
renumbered).
- **Production**: Has not run either 008 or 009 yet.
## Solution
- Rename `008_clean_invalid_data.sql` → `007a_clean_invalid_data.sql`
- Rename `009_separate_official_metadata.sql` →
`008_separate_official_metadata.sql` (back to original)
## How This Fixes It
With this renumbering:
1. **Staging behavior**:
- Sees 008 is already complete (the metadata migration it already ran)
- Sees 007a as new and runs it, but it will be a no-op (skips because
staging doesn't have the problematic production data)
- Continues normally
2. **Production behavior**:
- Runs 007a (cleanup migration) - removes invalid data
- Runs 008 (metadata separation) - applies successfully because data is
now clean
- Both migrations run in the correct order as intended
## Testing
- Verified migration order works correctly
- Tested on empty database (test environment) - 007a skips as expected
- Tested with production data snapshot - 007a cleans data, 008 applies
successfully
This is a critical fix to unblock staging deployment.
## Summary
This PR adds two important improvements to ensure data integrity:
1. **Adds server name format validation at the API layer** to match the
database constraint from migration 008
2. **Includes migration 008 to clean up invalid data** before applying
strict constraints in migration 009
## Changes
### Server Name Validation
- Enforces validation at the API layer matching the database constraint
- **Namespace pattern**: `[a-zA-Z0-9][a-zA-Z0-9.-]*[a-zA-Z0-9]`
- Must start and end with alphanumeric characters
- Can contain dots and hyphens in the middle
- **Name pattern**: `[a-zA-Z0-9][a-zA-Z0-9._-]*[a-zA-Z0-9]`
- Must start and end with alphanumeric characters
- Can contain dots, underscores, and hyphens in the middle
- Provides clear, user-friendly error messages indicating which part is
invalid
- Uses DRY approach with composed regex patterns
### Migration 008: Data Cleanup
- Removes servers with invalid names or empty versions (5 servers
affected in production)
- Fixes invalid status values by setting them to 'active' (1 server
affected)
- Removes duplicate name+version combinations
- Includes comprehensive safety checks to prevent accidental data loss
- Must run before migration 009 which adds strict constraints
## Testing
- All validator tests pass
- Migration includes safety checks that match production data
- CI verification included
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Summary
- Applied `gofmt -s -w` across the entire codebase to ensure consistent
Go formatting
- This will trigger a deployment with minimal code changes
## Test plan
- [x] Pre-commit hooks pass
- [x] No functional changes, formatting only
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
## Summary
- Fixes migration 008 failing with "column contains null values" error
- Adds COALESCE protection to handle 126 servers without status fields
- Includes test utilities to reproduce and verify fixes with production
data
## Problem
Migration 008 was failing in production because:
- 126 out of 781 servers have no `status` field in their JSON
- When extracting `rec.value->>'status'`, these became NULL values
- The `ALTER TABLE servers ALTER COLUMN status SET NOT NULL` constraint
then failed
## Solution
1. **Prevent NULLs during migration**: Use COALESCE to provide 'active'
default when status is NULL/empty
2. **Enhanced debugging**: Added RAISE NOTICE statements to log
problematic values
3. **Safety check**: Double-check that throws exception if any NULLs
remain
4. **Test utilities**: Created mirror_data tools to test migrations with
real production data
## Testing
Created and used `scripts/mirror_data/` tools to:
- Fetch all 781 servers from production API
- Load them into a test database
- Verify the migration fix works correctly
### Results:
- **Before fix**: 126 NULL status values created during migration
- **After fix**: 0 NULL status values, all servers have valid status
- Migration completes successfully with NOT NULL constraint
## Test plan
- [x] Tested locally with production data using mirror_data tools
- [x] Verified 0 NULL values after migration (vs 126 before)
- [x] Confirmed NOT NULL constraint adds successfully
- [ ] Deploy to staging and verify migration succeeds
- [ ] Monitor production deployment
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
The following PR tries to ensure sane defaults for entries that for one
reason or another have NULL values for some of their properties.
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
---------
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
## Problem
Production deployment is failing with CrashLoopBackOff. Migration 008
fails with:
```
ERROR: column "status" of relation "servers" contains null values (SQLSTATE 23502)
```
## Root Cause
The migration extracts the `status` field from an unexpected location in
the data structure.
### Actual Data Structure (Before Migration)
In the current format, `status` is at the **top level** of the JSON, not
nested in official metadata:
```json
{
"name": "com.example/server",
"version": "1.0.0",
"status": "active", ← STATUS IS HERE (top level)
"_meta": {
"io.modelcontextprotocol.registry/official": {
"serverId": "uuid",
"publishedAt": "2025-09-01T00:00:00Z",
"isLatest": true
// NO STATUS FIELD HERE
}
}
}
```
For 120 out of 765 servers, the status field is **missing entirely**:
```json
{
"name": "com.biodnd/agent-ip",
"version": "0.1.2",
// ← NO STATUS FIELD AT ALL
"_meta": {
"io.modelcontextprotocol.registry/official": {
"serverId": "uuid",
"publishedAt": "2025-09-23T09:47:07Z",
"isLatest": true
// STILL NO STATUS FIELD HERE
}
}
}
```
### Original Migration Logic
```sql
IF official_meta IS NOT NULL THEN
UPDATE servers
SET
status = (official_meta->>'status'), -- Extracts NULL for all servers
```
**Result:**
- All 765 servers would have NULL status extracted
- Because `official_meta->>'status'` returns NULL (field doesn't exist
there)
- The migration tries to add `NOT NULL` constraint → fails
### Fixed Migration Logic
```sql
IF official_meta IS NOT NULL THEN
UPDATE servers
SET
status = COALESCE(NULLIF(rec.value->>'status', 'null'), 'active'),
```
**Result:**
- Extracts from top-level JSON where status actually exists
- `NULLIF(rec.value->>'status', 'null')` handles edge case of literal
string "null"
- `COALESCE(..., 'active')` provides fallback when status is missing
- All servers get valid status value
### Impact Breakdown
**645 servers with `"status": "active"`:**
- Before fix: Would extract NULL → migration fails
- After fix: Extracts "active" correctly
**120 servers with missing status field:**
- Before fix: Would extract NULL → migration fails
- After fix: Defaults to 'active' via COALESCE
## Example Servers with Missing Status
(First 9 discovered during investigation)
- com.biodnd/agent-ip
- io.github.jkakar/cookwith-mcp
- com.joelverhagen.mcp/Knapcode.SampleMcpServer
- io.github.Lyellr88/marm-mcp-server
- com.biodnd/agent-press
- io.github.timheuer/sampledotnetmcpserver
- io.github.CodeCraftersLLC/local-voice-mcp
- com.biodnd/agent-fin
- io.github.ruvnet/ruv-swarm
## Testing
Verified against production data (765 total servers):
- ✅ All servers have official metadata
- ✅ None have status in official metadata (expected)
- ✅ 645 have "status": "active" at top level
- ✅ 120 have missing status field (no field present)
- ✅ Fix extracts from correct location for all cases
## Impact
This unblocks production deployment. Once merged and released as v1.2.1,
the migration will:
1. Extract status from the correct location (top-level JSON)
2. Handle missing status fields with sensible defaults
3. Successfully add NOT NULL constraint
4. Allow pods to start normally
---
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
- Add workflow_dispatch to deploy.yml for manual deployment triggers
- Document that releases don't auto-deploy to production
- Add instructions for deploying releases to production
- Add verification steps for deployment
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
Currently the `dns` and `http` based auth flows share code well in the
publisher tool. However there is a lot of duplication in the auth
endpoint. This on it's own is not a problem but it does make
enhancements to the proof record (the `v=MCPv1; ...` string) harder to
keep in sync.
This PR adds a `common.go` file to share logic between the two.
This supports work I am prototyping for
https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry/issues/482.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Added new test cases for the permissions. Ran them before and after the
refactoring to ensure no behavior change.
Ran existing UTs.
Ran the integration tests.
Manually exercised the flows locally.
## Breaking Changes
None.
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [x] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [x] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [x] New and existing tests pass locally
- [x] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
The following PR adds a simple unit test to ensure the served API
handlers are a superset of the reference OpenAPI schema.
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
Fixes: https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry/issues/567
---------
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
## Motivation and Context
Replace server-only `http.MaxBytesReader(nil, ...)` with
`io.LimitReader` to cap the fetched body to 4KB in key fetcher. This
avoids passing a `nil` ResponseWriter and aligns with Go idioms. If more
than 4KB is received, return a clear error. Previously `MaxBytesReader`
returned a misleading `http: request body too large` error, which is
server-oriented. With this change the error becomes `HTTP auth key
response too large`.
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
Add tests covering success, oversized bodies, connection failure,
non-200 status, and read failures. This covers almost all lines of
`FetchKey` method of `DefaultHTTPKeyFetcher`. For tests, I also added a
new initialiser `NewDefaultHTTPKeyFetcherWithClient` so that the HTTP
client could be modified for test use.
Tests use `httptest.NewTLSServer` plus a helper to construct a client
pinned to the test server.
`auth` package test coverage increased from 56.8% to 59.3%.
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
None.
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [x] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [x] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [x] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [x] New and existing tests pass locally
- [x] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
Signed-off-by: Ville Vesilehto <ville@vesilehto.fi>
## Summary
Fixes a race condition where a server could have no version marked as
`isLatest` if the database operations failed independently.
## Changes
- **CreateServer signature**: Now accepts `oldLatestVersionID` parameter
to atomically unmark previous latest version
- **PostgreSQL implementation**: Uses a transaction to ensure UPDATE
(unmark old latest) and INSERT (create new version) happen atomically
- **Service layer**: Maintains `WithPublishLock` for concurrent
operation serialization
- **Two-level protection**: Advisory lock prevents races, transaction
ensures atomicity
## Test plan
- [x] Existing race condition tests pass
- [x] Integration tests pass
- [x] Unit tests pass
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.ai/code)
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
Housekeeping on leftover psql references
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
Package identifier and version are required for some of the registries
else we won't be able to pull the meta data to validate the packages.
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
This is in continuation to
https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry/pull/424
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
Unit test.
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
No
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
Co-authored-by: Avish Porwal <avishporwal@microsoft.com>
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
The follow PR removes the in-memory database option from the registry.
We had a chat about this with @domdomegg and although it is supposed to
be convenient, it isn't that useful in reality. We want to test and
develop the registry in a setup that is closer to the environment it is
supposed to be run. One of the main reasons are:
* We don't use it anywhere else besides unit testing and potentially
local development. Instead we should use postgresql for reliable results
(in-memory was actually giving false positive results)
* We have to keep maintaining it and make sure it mimics the behaviour
we have for postgresql which is not yielding a lot of value
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
Yes, I've updated the test unit make target to run in the postgresql
environment and now we can see the race condition issue happening.
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
No
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
---------
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
## Summary
Fixes a concurrent map access vulnerability in the OIDC handler that
could cause remote unauthenticated DoS.
## Changes
- Removed OIDC authorization flow endpoints ( and )
- Removed the unsynchronized map that caused the data race
- Kept only the OIDC token exchange endpoint ()
- Simplified by removing OAuth2 flow dependencies
The map was being accessed concurrently by the start (write) and
callback (read/delete) endpoints without synchronization, causing
runtime panics. Since the token exchange flow doesn't require session
state, removing the authorization flow eliminates the vulnerability
entirely.
## Summary
Fixes race conditions in concurrent server publishing that could result
in data integrity violations:
- Multiple versions marked as `isLatest=true` for the same server
- Duplicate (serverId, version) combinations
- Same server name assigned different serverIDs
## Solution
Uses two complementary approaches for correctness:
### 1. PostgreSQL Advisory Locks
- Serializes concurrent publishes per server name using
`pg_advisory_xact_lock`
- Uses FNV-1a hash to convert server name to lock ID
- Transaction-scoped locks auto-release on commit/rollback
- **Required after #465**: The serverId introduction means concurrent
publishes must atomically coordinate whether to reuse an existing
serverId (for additional versions) or generate a new one (for first
version). Without locks, race conditions would assign different
serverIDs to versions of the same server.
### 2. Unique Constraints (Migration 007)
Two new indexes provide data integrity guarantees:
- **idx_unique_server_version**: Ensures (serverId, version) is unique
across all versions
- **idx_unique_latest_version**: Partial index ensuring only one version
per serverId has `isLatest=true`
These constraints serve as defense-in-depth safety nets. Even if lock
logic had a bug, the database would reject integrity violations.
Also drops redundant `idx_servers_version_id` since `version_id` is
already the primary key.
## Why WithPublishLock validation is needed after #465
The `ctx.Err()` check at the start of `WithPublishLock` is critical
because:
1. After #465 introduced serverId, the publish flow must atomically
check existing versions and assign/reuse serverId
2. If the context is cancelled during lock acquisition, we could
deadlock
3. Checking ctx validity before acquiring locks prevents these deadlocks
## Testing
Added `TestPublishConcurrentVersionsNoRace` with 100 concurrent
goroutines publishing different versions of the same server. All succeed
with:
- Exactly one version marked as latest
- All versions sharing the same serverId
- No duplicate (serverId, version) combinations
NB: this only covers the in memory db, not the postgres db. It'd be nice
to write tests for this one as well, but our current setup is a bit
annoying for this. Separately looking into ways to easily run all our
tests with real postgres and ideally scrap memory.go completely.
## Motivation and Context
- Make all entries in current database matching the new schema
## How Has This Been Tested?
- locally
## Breaking Changes
- Yes
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [X] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [X] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [X] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [X] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [X] I have added or updated documentation as needed
Before migration:
```
{
"name": "io.github.kenjihikmatullah/productboard-mcp",
"description": "Integrate the Productboard API into agentic workflows via MCP",
"status": "active",
"repository": {
"url": "https://github.com/kenjihikmatullah/productboard-mcp",
"source": "github",
"id": "939104710"
},
"version": "0.0.1-seed",
"packages": [
{
"registry_type": "npm",
"identifier": "productboard-mcp",
"version": "1.0.1",
"transport": {
"type": "stdio"
}
}
],
"_meta": {
"io.modelcontextprotocol.registry/official": {
"id": "00613acb-73e2-4f93-8b96-296df17316c8",
"published_at": "0001-01-01T00:00:00Z",
"updated_at": "0001-01-01T00:00:00Z",
"is_latest": true
}
}
}
```
After migration:
```
{
"name": "io.github.kenjihikmatullah/productboard-mcp",
"description": "Integrate the Productboard API into agentic workflows via MCP",
"status": "active",
"repository": {
"url": "https://github.com/kenjihikmatullah/productboard-mcp",
"source": "github",
"id": "939104710"
},
"version": "0.0.1-seed",
"packages": [
{
"registryType": "npm",
"identifier": "productboard-mcp",
"version": "1.0.1",
"transport": {
"type": "stdio"
},
}
],
"_meta": {
"io.modelcontextprotocol.registry/official": {
"serverId": "83cfe55c-55c5-4e7e-b9c0-6d7d369f52ed",
"versionId": "00613acb-73e2-4f93-8b96-296df17316c8",
"publishedAt": "0001-01-01T00:00:00Z",
"updatedAt": "0001-01-01T00:00:00Z",
"isLatest": true
}
}
}
Wielded Claude Code to do this; across many iterations and have reviewed
all the code + largely rewritten the PR commentary here.
This PR implements the server ID consistency changes from
[#396](https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry/issues/396). Our
goal is to:
- Rename `id` to `versionId` to make it clear that it is the ID for a
specific version, not a server
- Introduce `serverId` as a net new concept. This will be 1:1 with
`name`. While not strictly necessary (we could just use name as a PK),
the convention of having a UUID as an ID on our objects is just a
helpful subjective architecture decision. Plus also leaves open the door
to reconsidering the "should we allow renames" question.
## Key Changes
### 🗄️ Database Schema Changes
- **Renamed**: `id` column → `version_id` (unique identifier for each
server version)
### 📋 Metadata Structure Updates
- **JSON Schema**: Updated
`_meta.io.modelcontextprotocol.registry/official` to include:
- `serverId`: Consistent ID across all versions of a server
- `versionId`: Unique ID for this specific version (renamed from `id`)
### 🔧 API Endpoint Updates
- **New endpoint structure**: Changed from version-ID-based to
server-ID-based URLs:
- `GET /v0/servers/{server_id}` - Get latest version of server
- `GET /v0/servers/{server_id}?version=X.X.X` - Get specific version
- `GET /v0/servers/{server_id}/versions` - List all versions of a server
- `PUT /v0/servers/{server_id}?version=X.X.X` - Edit specific version
- **Consistent URL patterns**: All server endpoints now use `server_id`
as the primary identifier
### Database Migration Strategy
The migration (`005_add_server_id_rename_version_id.sql`):
1. Adds new `version_id` column
2. Generates deterministic UUIDs for servers with the same name
3. Updates JSON metadata to add `serverId` and rename `id` to
`versionId`
4. Copies existing `id` values to `version_id` column
5. Drops old `id` column and makes `version_id` the new primary key
## Testing
Besides of course automated tests passing, I:
1. Set up my local db with the pre-005-migration state, imported all the
production data
2. Ran the migration
3. Spot checked some diffs of the data that resulted --
```json
// before
{
"name": "io.github.ruvnet/ruv-swarm",
"_meta": {
"io.modelcontextprotocol.registry/official": {
"id": "0a9cda7f-2b73-4839-844b-6582f335de42",
"is_latest": false,
"updated_at": "2025-09-10T17:21:34.92137012Z",
"published_at": "2025-09-10T17:15:32.69690433Z"
}
},
"version": "1.0.18",
"repository": {
"url": "",
"source": ""
},
"description": "Neural network swarm orchestration with WebAssembly acceleration and MCP integration"
}
// after
{
"name": "io.github.ruvnet/ruv-swarm",
"_meta": {
"io.modelcontextprotocol.registry/official": {
"serverId": "e8538952-96af-4a33-9e31-7fbed012521e",
"is_latest": false,
"versionId": "0a9cda7f-2b73-4839-844b-6582f335de42",
"updated_at": "2025-09-10T17:21:34.92137012Z",
"published_at": "2025-09-10T17:15:32.69690433Z"
}
},
"version": "1.0.18",
"repository": {
"url": "",
"source": ""
},
"description": "Neural network swarm orchestration with WebAssembly acceleration and MCP integration"
}
```
Servers that have multiple versions stayed consistent in their
`serverId`:
```json
// First version
{
"name": "app.getdialer/dialer",
"_meta": {
"io.modelcontextprotocol.registry/official": {
"serverId": "80f08bdb-f3e4-4f19-b072-1676ae49b663",
"is_latest": false,
"versionId": "04f25b17-331d-48d7-b08b-37baece208a7",
"updated_at": "2025-09-09T00:16:49.162620072Z",
"published_at": "2025-09-08T23:47:09.452137971Z"
}
},
"status": "active",
"$schema": "https://static.modelcontextprotocol.io/schemas/2025-07-09/server.schema.json",
"remotes": [
{
"url": "https://getdialer.app/mcp",
"type": "streamable-http"
},
{
"url": "https://getdialer.app/sse",
"type": "sse"
}
],
"version": "1.0.0",
"repository": {
"url": "",
"source": ""
},
"description": "An MCP server that provides your you make outbound phone calls using your own phone number"
}
// Second version
{
"name": "app.getdialer/dialer",
"_meta": {
"io.modelcontextprotocol.registry/official": {
"serverId": "80f08bdb-f3e4-4f19-b072-1676ae49b663",
"is_latest": true,
"versionId": "faa26cb9-3aad-415e-aece-f715fff5fe5e",
"updated_at": "2025-09-09T00:16:49.107842808Z",
"published_at": "2025-09-09T00:16:49.107842808Z"
}
},
"status": "active",
"$schema": "https://static.modelcontextprotocol.io/schemas/2025-07-09/server.schema.json",
"remotes": [
{
"url": "https://getdialer.app/mcp",
"type": "streamable-http"
},
{
"url": "https://getdialer.app/sse",
"type": "sse"
}
],
"version": "1.0.1",
"repository": {
"url": "",
"source": ""
},
"description": "An MCP server that provides lets you make outbound phone calls using your own phone number"
}
```
And I also tried publishing a test server anew; looked good:
```bash
⏺ Bash(curl -s "http://localhost:8080/v0/servers/102dc4e4-6ca8-40e6-aa11-cd45763d3352" | jq '.')
⎿ {
"$schema": "https://static.modelcontextprotocol.io/schemas/2025-07-09/server.schema.json",
"name": "io.modelcontextprotocol.anonymous/test-claude-migration-server",
"description": "A test server to verify the new migration and API endpoints work correctly",
"status": "active",
"repository": {
"url": "https://github.com/example/test-claude-migration-server",
"source": "github",
"id": "example/test-claude-migration-server"
},
"version": "1.0.0",
"_meta": {
"io.modelcontextprotocol.registry/official": {
"serverId": "102dc4e4-6ca8-40e6-aa11-cd45763d3352",
"versionId": "48c9cd55-7bc4-4ac2-896e-59e81eb653e4",
"published_at": "2025-09-12T18:33:23.264203-07:00",
"updated_at": "2025-09-12T18:33:23.264203-07:00",
"is_latest": true
}
}
}
⏺ Bash(curl -s "http://localhost:8080/v0/servers/102dc4e4-6ca8-40e6-aa11-cd45763d3352/versions" | jq '.')
⎿ {
"servers": [
{
"$schema": "https://static.modelcontextprotocol.io/schemas/2025-07-09/server.schema.json",
"name": "io.modelcontextprotocol.anonymous/test-claude-migration-server",
"description": "A test server to verify the new migration and API endpoints work correctly",
"status": "active",
"repository": {
"url": "https://github.com/example/test-claude-migration-server",
"source": "github",
"id": "example/test-claude-migration-server"
},
"version": "1.0.0",
"_meta": {
"io.modelcontextprotocol.registry/official": {
"serverId": "102dc4e4-6ca8-40e6-aa11-cd45763d3352",
"versionId": "48c9cd55-7bc4-4ac2-896e-59e81eb653e4",
"published_at": "2025-09-12T18:33:23.264203-07:00",
"updated_at": "2025-09-12T18:33:23.264203-07:00",
"is_latest": true
}
}
}
],
"metadata": {
"count": 1
}
}
```
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Preeti Dewani <preetidewani1990@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: adam jones <adamj+git@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Adam Jones <adamj@anthropic.com>
This commit implements support for publishing MCP servers to GitHub
Container
Registry (ghcr.io) in addition to the existing Docker Hub support,
addressing
Docker Hub rate limiting concerns as requested in #393.
Key changes:
- Add RegistryURLGHCR constant for https://ghcr.io
- Refactor OCI validation to support multiple container registries with
extensible RegistryConfig system
- Implement registry-agnostic authentication system that handles:
- Docker Hub token-based authentication via auth.docker.io
- GHCR token-based authentication via ghcr.io/token service
- Update Accept headers to support OCI image indexes for multi-arch
images
- Extract helper functions to reduce cyclomatic complexity and improve
code maintainability
- Add comprehensive test coverage for both Docker Hub and GHCR scenarios
- Include real image testing with github/github-mcp-server and
nkapila6/mcp-local-rag
- Update publishing documentation with GHCR examples and authentication
details
The implementation maintains backward compatibility with existing Docker
Hub
usage while providing a future-proof architecture for adding additional
container registries. All authentication is now handled through proper
token
services for both registries.
Fixes#393
## Motivation and Context
Docker Hub rate limiting has been causing issues for the MCP registry
when validating OCI images. Adding GHCR support provides an alternative
container registry that many MCP server authors are already using,
reducing the load on Docker Hub and providing more options for the
community.
## How Has This Been Tested?
- All existing unit tests continue to pass
- Added comprehensive test coverage for GHCR scenarios including:
- Non-existent images (proper error handling)
- Real images without MCP annotations (github/github-mcp-server)
- Real images with proper MCP annotations (nkapila6/mcp-local-rag)
- Registry URL validation for both supported registries
- Tested authentication flow manually using curl commands
- Verified multi-arch image support with OCI index manifests
## Breaking Changes
None. This is a purely additive change that maintains full backward
compatibility with existing Docker Hub configurations.
## Types of changes
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [x] Documentation update
## Checklist
- [x] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [x] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [x] New and existing tests pass locally
- [x] I have added appropriate error handling
- [x] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
The implementation uses a RegistryConfig struct to abstract
registry-specific details like API endpoints, authentication URLs, and
token services. This design makes it straightforward to add support for
additional container registries in the future (such as AWS ECR, Azure
Container Registry, etc.) by simply adding new cases to the
getRegistryConfig function.
The authentication system properly handles the different token services
used by each registry:
- Docker Hub: auth.docker.io with service=registry.docker.io
- GHCR: ghcr.io/token with service=ghcr.io
Both registries now support the full OCI specification including
multi-arch images via OCI image indexes.
## Summary
Added validation to reject server names with multiple slashes, ensuring
consistency between JSON schema pattern and API validation.
- Count slashes in parseServerName() and reject if > 1
- Add ErrMultipleSlashesInServerName error constant
- Add unit tests in validators_test.go
- Add integration test in publish_test.go
## Motivation and Context
Fixes#471. The JSON schema regex pattern `^[^/]+/[^/]+$` only allows a
single slash in server names, but the API validation was not enforcing
this constraint. This inconsistency
allowed invalid server names like `com.example/server/path` to be
published.
## How Has This Been Tested?
- Unit tests added to verify slash validation logic
- Integration tests added to verify the publish endpoint rejects
multi-slash names
- Tested various edge cases: trailing slashes, consecutive slashes,
URL-like paths
- All existing tests pass
## Breaking Changes
None. This change only adds validation to reject previously invalid
server names that shouldn't have been accepted.
## Types of changes
- [x] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
- [x] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [x] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [x] New and existing tests pass locally
- [x] I have added appropriate error handling
- [x] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
- The fix ensures server names follow the intended format:
`namespace/name` (e.g., `com.example/my-server`)
- This validation aligns the API behavior with the existing JSON schema
regex pattern
- Test coverage includes edge cases like `com.example//server`,
`com.example/server/`, and `a/b/c/d/e/f`
- The error message clearly indicates the issue: "server name cannot
contain multiple slashes"
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
Validates that server versions are not ranges.
**NB:** This also introduces `validateVersion` as a check on the
top-level `ValidateServerJSON`, as previously we were only checking
version ranges of packages via `validatePackageField` (i.e. `latest`
would have still been a valid top level server version), despite #413's
wording suggesting otherwise.
## Motivation and Context
Solves https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry/issues/415
## How Has This Been Tested?
Tests added in `internal/validators/validators_test.go`
`make check` is clean.
## Breaking Changes
As per @domdomegg's comment, we should
> check nobody has done this in the existing registry data (if they
have, we should explore and understand why people have done this / if
it's valid etc.).
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [x] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [x] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [x] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [x] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [x] New and existing tests pass locally
- [x] I have added appropriate error handling
- [x] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
## Summary
- Add URL encoding for package identifiers and versions in NPM registry
requests
- Fixes issue where scoped packages like @hellocoop/admin-mcp failed
validation due to unencoded @ and / symbols
- Add unit tests for scoped NPM packages to prevent regression
Fixes#409
Co-authored-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
Claude wrote this extra test while I was doing some other work
experimenting with stuff, seems useful to have!
Also deleted the unnecessary expectedServers, because we basically never
assert on it.
Adds optional website_url field to the server.json schema allowing
publishers to provide a url to the server's homepage, documentation, or
project website. This provides a central link for users to learn more
about the server. Particularly useful when the server has custom
installation instructions or setup requirements.
Issue: #183
PR: #130
Discussion: #274
## Motivation and Context
This change addresses the need identified in #130, #183 and #274 for a
standardized way to direct users to an official landing page similar to
`homepage` used in NPM
([example](https://www.npmjs.com/package/@modelcontextprotocol/sdk)). It
is also serves as a viable option for MCP Servers that don't follow
typical package manager patterns (e.g., embedded in a Desktop app).
## How Has This Been Tested?
- Schema validation: All 13 example server.json files validate
successfully against the updated schema
- Go validator tests: Added additional test cases covering URL format
validation and namespace matching
- Run all checks: Updated example files to work with anonymous
publishing and verified `make check` passes
## Breaking Changes
None. The website_url field is optional and backward compatible with
existing server.json files.
## Types of changes
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [x] Documentation update
## Checklist
- [x] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [x] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [x] New and existing tests pass locally
- [x] I have added appropriate error handling
- [x] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
Security considerations:
- Website URL validation enforces that the domain matches the
publisher's reverse-DNS namespace
- HTTP/HTTPS protocols are required (no file:// or other schemes)
- Validation is consistent with existing remote URL validation patterns
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
Adding validation for version and identifier for packages.
## Motivation and Context
While debugging a bug, I found out that we need exact version to be
there in package to fetch from npm, otherwise we won't be able to parse
the response as it returns all versions. Even if we do, we still need to
go and figure out which version have the mcpname associated with while
iterating over all versions. So, we should make mandatory to have
identifier and version present in the given package object if we want to
validate package association with registries.
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
UTs.
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [x] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
Co-authored-by: Avish Porwal <avishporwal@microsoft.com>
Resolves#419 where URLs with trailing slashes like `/v0/servers/` would
return empty responses instead of proper data.
**Changes**:
- Added TrailingSlashMiddleware that redirects trailing slash URLs with
301 status
- Preserves root path ('/') without redirecting
- Uses HTTP 301 Moved Permanently to indicate canonical form
- Added comprehensive test coverage for the middleware
This follows REST API best practices and is consistent with how major Go
web frameworks handle trailing slash normalization.
Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.ai/code)
---------
Co-authored-by: claude[bot] <209825114+claude[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: adam jones <domdomegg@users.noreply.github.com>
## Summary
The permission error now displays what namespaces the user has
permission to publish and what namespace they attempted to publish. This
helps users debug permission mismatches more easily.
Helps mitigate #398 to enable us to figure out what's going on
