<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
run the application as a non-root user.
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
run the application as a non-root user.
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
YES, build the docker image.
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
## 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: hurricane1988 <niujianping_qm@dayu.work>
Co-authored-by: adam jones <domdomegg+git@gmail.com>
Migrate golangci-lint from v1 to v2.
## Motivation and Context
The golangci-lint has been upgraded to v2 since March 2025.
The v2 of golangci-lint has simplified the linters management.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Tested locally with golangci-lint@v2.1.6
## Breaking Changes
No.
## 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)
- [ ] 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
-->
---------
Co-authored-by: haokunt <haokunt@opera.com>
Co-authored-by: Avinash Sridhar <sridharavinash@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Adam Jones <adamj+git@anthropic.com>
Issue: links directive was failing on podman
- Removed unsupported 'links' directive for Podman compatibility
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
It was failing on Podman because Podman doesn't support the links
directive that Docker Compose does, and we already using depends_on,
which establishes the dependency relationship between services; we can
simply remove the links section from your docker-compose.yml file.
## Motivation and Context
docker-compose -links deprecated #107
Fix the defect by removing link.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Yes. Test by running on both.
For Docker run.
docker build -t registry .
docker compose up
For Podman
podman build -t registry .
podman compose up
## Breaking Changes
Yes for podman.
## 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)
- [ x] 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
- [x ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
It is related to issue #107
Co-authored-by: Avinash Sridhar <sridharavinash@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: adam jones <domdomegg+git@gmail.com>
Renamed `data/seed_2025_05_16.json` to `data/seed.json` and updated `Dockerfile`
## Motivation and Context
When cloning the repository and building the project using:
```bash
go build ./cmd/registry
.\\registry.exe
```
the application fails to start because the default seed file path
(`data/seed.json`) does not exist in the repo:
```
Failed to read seed file: failed to read file: open data/seed.json: The system cannot find the file specified.
```
## How Has This Been Tested?
```bash
go build ./cmd/registry
.\\registry.exe // ./registry
```
## Breaking Changes
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
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
Co-authored-by: Adam Jones <adamj+git@anthropic.com>
This PR removes the gitignore entry for `publisher` since this
means we gitignore all folders and files named `publisher`.
My assumption is the intent for this was to just ignore binaries named
`publisher` but currently that binary is going to be located at
`tools/publisher/bin/mcp-publisher` and the **/bin pattern already
ignores all bin/ directories (taken from the build.sh).
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
Co-authored-by: adam jones <domdomegg+git@gmail.com>
Auto build image when we run `docker compose up`, Make it start more
easy for beginner.
## Motivation and Context
When I try to use `docker compose up` start the MCP server, docker
default pull `registry` image from dockerhub, because I forget build
image first.
Maybe we don't need to manually build the image, just build it
automatically when docker compose starts
## How Has This Been Tested?
Just run `docker-compose up --build` at a environment has installed
docker and docker compose.
Signed-off-by: 疯魔慕薇 <kfanjian@gmail.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>
The `publisher create` command now automatically sets the `runtime_hint`
field in the generated `server.json` based on the `registry_name` when
no explicit `--runtime-hint` is provided:
- When `registry_name` is `docker`, sets `runtime_hint` to `docker`
- When `registry_name` is `npm`, sets `runtime_hint` to `npx`
- Other registries remain unchanged (no `runtime_hint` field)
## Before
```bash
# NPM registry - no runtime_hint field generated
$ mcp-publisher create --name "test-server" --description "Test" --repo-url "https://github.com/test/repo" --registry npm
```
```json
{
"packages": [
{
"registry_name": "npm",
"name": "test-server",
"version": "1.0.0"
}
]
}
```
## After
```bash
# NPM registry - automatically sets runtime_hint to "npx"
$ mcp-publisher create --name "test-server" --description "Test" --repo-url "https://github.com/test/repo" --registry npm
```
```json
{
"packages": [
{
"registry_name": "npm",
"name": "test-server",
"version": "1.0.0",
"runtime_hint": "npx"
}
]
}
```
The manual `--runtime-hint` flag continues to work and takes precedence
over the automatic setting, ensuring backward compatibility.
Fixes#204.
<!-- START COPILOT CODING AGENT TIPS -->
---
💬 Share your feedback on Copilot coding agent for the chance to win a
$200 gift card! Click
[here](https://survey.alchemer.com/s3/8343779/Copilot-Coding-agent) to
start the survey.
---------
Co-authored-by: copilot-swe-agent[bot] <198982749+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: toby <83556+toby@users.noreply.github.com>
This is a first PR for #159 - adding some validation scripts. I want to
get to a place where we are confident that making schema changes is in
sync with the rest of our code. Step one is making sure the schemas are
in sync with our examples. Step two will be making sure the schemas are
in sync with our actual Registry implementation code.
This is just for the JSON right now; if we're feeling good about this
approach I'll do an analogous change for the OpenAPI schemas as well.
I'll also follow with adding usage of these scripts to our CI pipeline
so we have automated checks on them with every change.
## Summary
- Added CLI validation tools for JSON schemas and examples in
`docs/server-json/`
- Fixed some minor validation errors found in `examples.md`
- Ensures schema consistency and example validity in CI/CD pipelines
## Changes
### New Validation Tools
1. **`tools/validate-schemas`** - Validates that `schema.json` and
`registry-schema.json` are valid JSON Schema documents
2. **`tools/validate-examples`** - Validates all JSON examples in
`examples.md` against both schemas
### Key Features
- ✅ Validates JSON schema syntax and structure
- ✅ Validates all examples against both base and registry schemas
- ✅ Tracks validation counts to prevent silent failures
- ✅ Proper exit codes for CI integration
- ✅ Clear error messages for debugging
### Fixes to examples.md
- Added missing `repository.id` field in NuGet example
- Changed `repository.source` from "gitlab" to "github" in Docker
example
### Usage
```bash
# From repository root
./tools/validate-schemas.sh
./tools/validate-examples.sh
```
## Testing
I ran these scripts locally with minor (breaking) changes, which they
each correctly reported. As submitted, they are both passing.
🤖 Co-authored with [Claude Code](https://claude.ai/code)
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Charles Lowell <10964656+chlowell@users.noreply.github.com>
## Summary
This PR improves the developer experience by adding clear linting
documentation and optional pre-commit hooks to catch issues before CI.
Helpful to avoid fighting Claude Code / Copilot on "please make sure
linting passes CI".
## Changes
- Updated `README.md` with:
- Go 1.23.x requirement (was "1.18 or later")
- golangci-lint v1.61.0 in prerequisites
- New Development section with linting instructions
- Updated `CLAUDE.md` with:
- Development Setup section
- Added `.githooks/pre-commit`:
- Runs golangci-lint and gofmt checks
- References README for installation instructions
- Can be bypassed with `--no-verify` when needed
## Test Plan
- [x] Verified pre-commit hook blocks commits when golangci-lint is
missing
- [x] Confirmed hook shows clear error message pointing to README
- [x] Tested that linting passes with Go 1.23.0 and golangci-lint
v1.61.0
- [x] Verified gofmt correctly identifies formatting issues
Co-authored w/ Claude Code
---------
Co-authored-by: Charles Lowell <10964656+chlowell@users.noreply.github.com>
<!-- 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/173
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
Copilot fixed my spelling mistakes.
## 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: -->
- [ ] 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. -->
- [ ] 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
-->
Ideally the `id` would be populated by the publisher CLI tool "on the
way out" and MCP Registry would validate the `id`, perhaps using the
token used for auth in the case of private repositories.
<!-- 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
## Summary
- Adds CLAUDE.md file to provide guidance for Claude Code instances
working with this repository
- Includes essential development commands and high-level architecture
overview
- Follows the standard format for Claude Code documentation
## Details
The CLAUDE.md file contains:
- Common development commands for building, running, testing, and
linting
- Architecture overview explaining the clean architecture pattern
- Request flow documentation
- Key interfaces and their implementations
- Authentication flow details
- Important design patterns used in the codebase
This will help future Claude Code instances be more productive when
working with the MCP Registry codebase.
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.ai/code)
Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Avinash Sridhar <sridharavinash@users.noreply.github.com>
Closes#155
The "generalized" `server.json` is the one that can be used in a variety
of situations:
- Discoverability on a centralized registry (i.e. our official Registry
work)
- Discoverability on a decentralized .well-known endpoint
- As a response to an initialization call, so the client knows
information about the MCP server to which it is connecting
- As an input into crafting a [DXT
file](https://www.anthropic.com/engineering/desktop-extensions)
- Packaged in with the source code of an MCP server, so as to have a
structured way context
Of these, the official Registry is but one use case. The Registry has a
unique set of concerns for which we are optimizing, like whitelisting of
specific registries we trust to host MCP server source code for the
public community (`npm`, `pypi`, etc). It is not necessary to have such
a constraint for the generalized server.json, which may be used in, for
example, an internal context where such a validation doesn't make sense.
So I've done the following at a high level:
- Renamed the prior `schema.json` to be `registry-schema.json`
- Introduced a more generic `schema.json` to serve as the schema for the
generalized `server.json`
- Refactored `registry-schema.json` to be simply a constraint on the
base `schema.json`
I made a few small changes in this transition:
- Removed `gitlab` as an option in `repository.source` for
`registry-schema.json`. I'm fine going live with just GitHub support;
would be happy to take a contribution from e.g. Gitlab employees or a
motivated Gitlab customer to expand anytime.
- Removed `homebrew` as an option in `packages.registry_name`; never
really made sense, not a place where folks are publishing MCP servers
- Added `docker` to `packages.runtime_hint`; was just a missing
oversight
- Gave both schemas a global `$id`
~- Removed `release_date` from both schemas. Certainly not something
that makes sense for the generalized schema. It actually doesn't make
sense for the Registry schema either, because this is the server.json
that _users will submit_, i.e. the _input_ into the Registry publication
API. `release_date` will be a piece of _output_ metadata. The Registry
API will be free to append such extra metadata for GET /:id requests of
servers, and the data can be present in the OpenAPI spec, but it does
not need to be in the registry-server.json JSON schema.~
- Note this is no longer in this PR; rebased on #168 which included it
- Removed unnecessary enums from the generalized `schema.json`
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
This is in support of
https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry/issues/159, to make it
easier, I hope. My team noticed some differences in the JSON schema,
most notably the "choices" property was missing. I tried to write a tool
to do this but slowed down since I am not experienced with Go. This is a
first pass, maybe someone else can finish the tooling.
I restructured the JSON schema to break out child objects like the YAML
file, and brought the descriptions and example into sync. The only
differences are two extra properties in the YAML which are computed by
the server:
- `VersionDetail.is_latest` is not present in the JSON schema, computed
by the registry based on
https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry/issues/158
- `Server.id` is not present in the JSON schema, generated by the
registry
The idea is the a tool could look at ServerDetail in the YAML and then
generate the schema.json with minimal fix-ups (add a root title, remove
`VersionDetail.is_latest` and `Server.id`.
~Question for @tadasant - should `VersionDetail.release_date` be in the
JSON schema? I think _no_ (and let it be computed) but it's there right
now.~ - aligned with
https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry/pull/167 and removed
## How Has This Been Tested?
I have tested the JSON schema against the sample server.json in the repo
(files and markdown blocks).
## Breaking Changes
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)
- [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
-->
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
Add more information about the value field under Input in the API doc.
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
the descrioption for
[value](81e5174a59/docs/openapi.yaml (L219))
is not clearly.
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
No need.
## 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)
- [ 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
-->
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
Add support for specifying database type (MongoDB or in-memory
database).
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
The README states that MCP Registry supports both MongoDB and in-memory
databases, but does not provide the capability to specify which database
type to use.
5d9171bdcc/README.md (L19)
This PR addresses this limitation by adding explicit database type
configuration through the `DATABASE_TYPE` environment variable, allowing
users to choose between `mongodb` and `memory` database types in a
standardized way.
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
Yes
```console
$ export MCP_REGISTRY_DATABASE_TYPE="memory"
$ ./scripts/test_endpoints.sh
Testing health endpoint: http://localhost:8080/v0/health
Status Code: 200
Response:
{
"status": "ok",
"github_client_id": ""
}
Health check successful
-------------------------------------
Testing servers endpoint: http://localhost:8080/v0/servers
Status Code: 200
Response Summary:
Total registries: 0
servers Names:
Pagination Metadata:
{}
servers Details:
{
"servers": [],
"metadata": {}
}
servers request successful
-------------------------------------
Testing ping endpoint: http://localhost:8080/v0/ping
Status Code: 200
Response:
{
"status": "ok",
"version": "dev"
}
Ping successful
-------------------------------------
All tests passed successfully!
```
## 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)
- [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
-->
Close#63
---------
Co-authored-by: Avinash Sridhar <sridharavinash@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Copilot <175728472+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
Rename mcp.json to server.json
## 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
-->
Related to #86
Co-authored-by: Avinash Sridhar <sridharavinash@users.noreply.github.com>
This pull request introduces significant updates to the authentication
system for the MCP Registry Publisher Tool. The changes focus on
transitioning to an interface-based authentication system, implementing
GitHub OAuth device flow as the default authentication method, and
restructuring the codebase for better modularity and extensibility.
Adding an interface to the publishing CLI, so that it'll be easier to
add more auth methods as they become available.
