## Motivation and Context
Docs currently don't have very clear organisation, and don't explain
core flows.
This fixes#89 (although we still might want to push these to
`https://modelcontextprotocol.io/docs/`), based on the plan there.
One minor change from that plan is that I merged tutorials and guides,
because they ended up basically being duplicates which I thought would
be annoying for us to keep in sync. Additionally in the Diátaxis
framework, tutorials and guides are separated by whether they are
focused on acquisition of skills (e.g. in a learning environment) or
application of skills (e.g. in a work environment). I expect the
registry to be something that will be used occasionally in a work
environment, rather than a fundamental 'learnable' skill so I think it's
reasonable not to have tutorials and fold these into guides.
## How Has This Been Tested?
- Read through all these updated docs
- Unit and integration tests (that previously used examples.md and use
the schema) working
- Ran `npx markdown-link-check .` to check all the links work
## Breaking Changes
Links to old docs will break, but I don't think there are any. All
internal links have been checked and updated.
## 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)
- [x] Documentation update
Adds an optional `subfolder` field to the Repository object in
server.json schema to support MCP servers located within subdirectories
of monorepo structures.
## Motivation and Context
Addresses issue #360 .
The current MCP registry schema doesn't explicitly define how to
reference servers that are located within a subdirectory of a Git
repository (a "monorepo" structure). This is a common pattern (e.g.,
[microsoft/mcp](https://github.com/microsoft/mcp) &
[awslabs/mcp](https://github.com/awslabs/mcp).
## How Has This Been Tested?
- **Validator tests**: Added 6 new test cases covering valid subfolders
and security validation (path traversal, absolute paths, invalid
characters, etc.)
- **Schema validation**: All 11 examples in `examples.md` validate
successfully against both `server.schema.json` and
`registry-schema.json`
- **End-to-end validation**: Publisher tool (`mcp-publisher init`) works
correctly and generates valid templates without subfolder
- **Backward compatibility**: Existing server.json files without
subfolder continue to work unchanged
## Breaking Changes
**None.** This is a fully backward-compatible change:
- The `subfolder` field is optional (uses `omitempty` JSON tag)
- Existing server.json files work unchanged
- Publisher tools generate valid templates without subfolder by default
- All existing validation and schemas remain compatible
## 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
### Implementation Details
**Schema Changes:**
- Added `subfolder` property to Repository definition in
`server.schema.json` and `openapi.yaml`
- Field is optional with description and example (`"src/everything"`)
**Go Model:**
- Added `Subfolder string` field to Repository struct with
`json:"subfolder,omitempty"` tag
- Maintains backward compatibility through omitempty behavior
**Security-Focused Validation:**
- Validates subfolder is a clean relative path (no leading `/`)
- Prevents path traversal attacks (no `..` sequences)
- Blocks malformed paths (no trailing `/`, empty segments, invalid
characters)
- Uses regex validation for allowed characters: `^[a-zA-Z0-9\-_./]+$`
**Documentation:**
- Added monorepo example to `examples.md` demonstrating subfolder usage
- Updated `repository_references.md` with concise subfolder
documentation
- Maintained consistency across all documentation with same example path
**Testing:**
- 6 new integration tests in validator covering security and format
validation
- Updated example count validation tool for new example
- All existing tests continue to pass
### Design Decisions
1. **Optional by design**: Most servers don't need subfolder
(single-repo pattern is common)
2. **Clean separation**: Repository URL stays clean, subfolder is
separate metadata
3. **Security first**: Comprehensive validation prevents common
path-based attacks
4. **Publisher tool unchanged**: Default templates don't include
subfolder to avoid confusion for typical use cases
This enables publishers with monorepo structures to clearly specify
server locations while maintaining simplicity for the common
single-repository case.
The Server schema should not have its own `id` property as the ID is
managed by the registry system through the
`_meta["io.modelcontextprotocol.registry"].id` field.
Fixes#336🤖 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>
Updates the registry type for all Docker Hub packages in the seed data
from `docker-hub` to `oci` to align with the standardized OCI registry
format. This change affects the `registry_type` field and simplifies the
`identifier` field by removing the full Docker Hub URL prefix.
Changes:
- Updated `registry_type` from `docker-hub` to `oci` for all Docker
packages
- Simplified `identifier` field to use just the repository name/path
instead of full URLs
- Maintained `registry_base_url` as `https://docker.io` for all entries
This refactoring improves consistency and aligns with OCI standards
while maintaining backward compatibility through the registry base URL.
## Description
This PR addresses #300 by adding explicit versioning to the MCP Registry
API OpenAPI specification.
## Changes
- Added `version: "2025-07-09"` field to the `info` section of the
OpenAPI specification
- Maintains consistency with existing date-based versioning used across
all schema files
## Rationale
As outlined in #300, the OpenAPI spec was missing an explicit version
field, which could lead to:
- Compatibility issues as the API evolves
- Lack of clarity for API consumers
- Missing functionality in OpenAPI tooling that expects a version field
This follows the MCP specification's date-based versioning approach.
Closes#300
## Motivation and Context
- Add MCPB as a new registry_name option
- Add file_hashes field to package model for integrity verification
- Implement URL validation restricting MCPB packages to GitHub/GitLab
hosts
- Require SHA-256 hash for all MCPB packages
- Add example MCPB package in documentation
- Update schemas and OpenAPI specification
See issue #260
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
## Breaking Changes
N/A, registry has not yet been launched
## 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)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [x] I have added or updated documentation as needed
---------
Co-authored-by: Adam Jones <adamj+git@anthropic.com>
## Summary
- Add optional `$schema` property to ServerDetail specification
- Update JSON Schema, OpenAPI spec, Go models, examples, and publisher
template
- Enable schema versioning and IDE validation support
## Changes
- Added `$schema` as optional string property with URI format in specs
- Updated Go ServerDetail struct with new Schema field
- Added `$schema` to examples and publisher template
- Copy schema file to ../static for GitHub Pages hosting
Fixes#139
This PR adds a new example to the OpenAPI specification that
demonstrates the publisher extensions feature recently added in #298.
## Changes
- Added \`example_org_server\` example to the OpenAPI spec
- Demonstrates \`x-publisher\` fields for contact email and build
metadata
- Shows organization-specific extensions (\`x-com.example\`) including:
- Marketplace icon URL
- Category classification
- Documentation URL
- Verified publisher status
This example helps developers understand how to use the new vendor
extensions functionality when publishing servers to the registry.
Co-authored-by: adam jones <adamj+git@anthropic.com>
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
This PR serves as a placeholder and brings together all of the changes
related to supporting vendor extensions passed through the API. The idea
is to have a single place to track and review the work as it comes
together (even if it’s still a bit of a work in progress).
**The changes in this PR cover:**
* Updates on the data model
* Updates on both databases (in-memory and postgresql), added a new
table to PSQL for tracking the extensions leaving the server table only
for the clean server.json properties
* Updates the seed.json file (thus the big line change)
* Adds a seed-migrate tool to help migrating an existing seed file to
the new format
* Updates the seed import mechanism to support this
* Updates the existing tests - unit, integration and validation tests
* Adds the publish handler to the OpenAPI spec (it was missing)
* Fixes linting errors
* Updates on the API side on (publish, list, get) to support the new
format of `ServerResponse` -
```
{
"server": {},
"x-io.modelcontextprotocol.registry": {}, /*not available for publish since this gets populated by the registry*/
"x-publisher": {}
}
```
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
Motivated by the discussions in:
https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry/discussions/284
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
Locally and by running all of the tests
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
Yes, it changes both the API and the format of the seed file
## 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)
- [ ] Documentation update
---
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
Co-authored-by: adam jones <domdomegg+git@gmail.com>
The following PR adds a new server `status` field to support the status
of servers, like deprecated or active
Details:
* Add status field to server.json schema with 'active' and 'deprecated'
values
* Update OpenAPI spec to include status field in Server responses
* Add ServerStatus enum and field to Go model structs
* Update examples to demonstrate status field usage (`active` and
`deprecated`)
Since this is my first PR there's a good chance I might have missed
something so I'll appreciate any feedback to make this and any PRs in
the future easier for you to review 😃Fixes: #181
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
The main goal is to have a way for server authors to notify registry
consumers that a server may no longer be maintained and shouldn't be
considered for using.
## 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. -->
- [x] 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>
Co-authored-by: Tadas Antanavicius <tadas@tadasant.com>
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
This is one attempt to resolve
https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry/issues/169.
Instead of adding a new "constant" argument type, I expanded the
existing positional one and just dropped the `value_hint` requirement. I
am not sure if this has VS Code impact @sandy081, @connor4312.
Also, removed unneeded release_date values from the samples.
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
I tested the current server.json samples in the repo against the new
(less strict) schema. Of course they passed (aside from an unrelated bug
in my previous NuGet sample 🤦).
## 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)
- [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
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] 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
-->
Closes#149
As noted in the FAQ update here, this is a helpful starting point in
thinking about this:
```
### What is the difference between "Official MCP Registry", "MCP Registry", "MCP registry", "MCP Registry API", etc?
There are four underlying concepts:
- "MCP Server Registry API" (or "MCP Registry API"): The OpenAPI specification defined in [openapi.yaml](./server-registry-api/openapi.yaml). This is a reusable API specification that anyone building any sort of "MCP server registry" should consider adopting / aligning with.
- "Official MCP Registry" (or "MCP Registry"): The application that lives at `https://registry.modelcontextprotocol.io`. This registry currently only catalogs MCP servers, but may be extended in the future to also catalog MCP client/host apps and frameworks.
- "Official MCP Registry API": The REST API that lives at `https://registry.modelcontextprotocol.io/api`, with an OpenAPI specification defined at [official-registry-openapi.yaml](./server-registry-api/official-registry-openapi.yaml)
- "MCP server registry" (or "MCP registry"): A third party, likely commercial, implementation of the MCP Server Registry API or derivative specification.
```
Prior to this PR, we were just treating "MCP Server Registry API" and
"Official MCP Registry API" to be the same thing. They are not the same:
the latter is inherently a more constrained version of the former. A
private deployment of a similar registry need not have constraints like
"the only valid source code repositories are `github` and `gitlab`".
This PR separates out the definitions to match that path forward.
## Notable Changes
### Base OpenAPI spec (`openapi.yaml`)
- Removed official-registry-specific constraints:
- No maximum limit on `/servers` endpoint
- No enum constraint on `Repository.source`
- No enum constraint on `Package.registry_name`
- Removed `/v0` prefix from paths (it's now just baked into the
`official` one's URL prefix)
- Added `$id` for proper schema identification
### Official Registry OpenAPI spec (`official-registry-openapi.yaml`)
- Created as a derivative of the base spec using `$ref`
- Re-adds official-registry-specific constraints:
- `Repository.source` enum: `[github]`
- `Package.registry_name` enum: `[npm, docker, pypi, nuget]`
### Documentation updates
- Added `server-registry-api/README.md` explaining the relationship
between specs
- Updated FAQ to clarify terminology
- Reorganized docs structure
