Add a `<Note>` component to all MDX files in
`docs/modelcontextprotocol-io/` informing readers that the MCP Registry
is currently in preview and that breaking changes or data resets may
occur before general availability.
The note also directs users to report issues on GitHub at
https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry/issues
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
- Fix `--private-key-file` to `--private-key` in `github-actions.mdx`
DNS authentication example (the CLI expects hex-encoded key data, not
a file path)
- Add missing `./` prefix to `mcp-publisher` command in PAT
authentication example
- Fix typo `verfication` to `verification` in troubleshooting table
- Remove duplicate word `authentication` in `quickstart.mdx`
prerequisites
- Fix `name` to `identifier` field in JSON examples in `versioning.mdx`
- Fix `PyPi` to `PyPI` (correct capitalization) in
`moderation-policy.mdx`
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Replace the markdown `# Frequently Asked Questions` heading with proper
MDX frontmatter that includes both `title` and `sidebarTitle` fields.
This brings the FAQ page in line with MDX documentation conventions.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Added schema validation and support for exhaustive and more detailed
validation to existing validators. Added new `mcp-publisher validate`
command. No change to any existing tests or behavior other than the new
command.
## Motivation and Context
Many currently published servers fail schema validation. Of those that
pass, many have semantic/logical errors or other errors that make them
impossible to configure, or their configuration when applied doesn't
generate correct MCP server configuration (per their own documentation).
To address this, we need better tooling to validate servers and to
inform server publishers of errors, issues, and best practices in a way
that is clear and actionable, both during server development and at time
of publishing.
I have started a discussion about the broader topic:
https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry/discussions/635
There is also a fairly detailed document describing the design,
architecture, implementation, future plans, etc. See [Enhanced
Validation Design](docs/explanations/proposed-enhanced-validation.md)
This PR is the first step in the process of improving validation. It
adds schema validation and updates all existing validators to use a new
model that allows them to track context and return rich and exhaustive
results. This has been done in a way that is backward compatible
(ValidateServerJSON is unchanged as are all existing validation unit
tests).
There is a new `mcp-publisher` command called `validate` that is
currenty the only place that schema validation and enhanced
(exhaustive/rich) validation results are exposed.
### Changes
Internal Validation improvements
- Schema validation has been implemented and is available as an option
in validation methods (defaults to off)
- Existing validators track the JSON path (context) of the attribute
they're evaluating, passing it to any child validators
- Existing validators are exhaustive (return all issues, not failing
fast on the first error)
- Existing validators return rich validation results, including:
- type (schema, semantic, linter)
- severity (error, warn, info)
- path (JSON path to server.json element)
- reference (to the schema element or rule that triggered the result)
- message (currently the same as previous error message)
A new `validate` command has been added to `mcp-publisher` so publishers
can evaluate their server.json before publishing
- Includes new schema validation and previous semantic validation
- Shows full details of all issues encountered during validation
### Usage
Given a server.json that looks like this:
```json
{
"$schema": "https://static.modelcontextprotocol.io/schemas/2025-09-29/server.schema.json",
"name": "io.github.BobDickinson/registry",
"description": "An MCP server that provides [describe what your server does]",
"repository": {
"url": "",
"source": ""
},
"version": "=1.0.0",
"packages": [
{
"registryType": "oci",
"registryBaseUrl": "https://docker.io",
"identifier": "registry",
"version": "1.0.0",
"transport": {
"type": "sse"
},
"packageArguments": [
{
"type": "named",
"name": "--mode",
"description": "Operation mode",
"format": "foo"
}
],
"environmentVariables": [
{
"description": "Your API key for the service",
"isRequired": true,
"format": "string",
"isSecret": true,
"name": "YOUR_API_KEY"
}
]
}
]
}
```
Run the command:
`mcp-publisher validate server.json`
Which will produce the output:
```bash
❌ Validation failed with 5 issue(s):
1. [error] packages.0.packageArguments.0.format (schema)
value must be one of "string", "number", "boolean", "filepath"
Reference: #/definitions/Input/properties/format/enum from: [#/definitions/ServerDetail]/properties/packages/items/[#/definitions/Package]/properties/packageArguments/items/[#/definitions/Argument]/else/[#/definitions/NamedArgument]/allOf/0/[#/definitions/InputWithVariables]/allOf/0/[#/definitions/Input]/properties/format/enum
2. [error] packages.0.transport (schema)
missing required fields: 'url'
Reference: #/definitions/SseTransport/required from: [#/definitions/ServerDetail]/properties/packages/items/[#/definitions/Package]/properties/transport/else/else/[#/definitions/SseTransport]/required
3. [error] repository.url (schema)
'' has invalid format 'uri'
Reference: #/definitions/Repository/properties/url/format from: [#/definitions/ServerDetail]/properties/repository/[#/definitions/Repository]/properties/url/format
4. [error] version (semantic)
version must be a specific version, not a range: "=1.0.0"
Reference: version-looks-like-range
5. [error] packages[0].transport.url (semantic)
url is required for sse transport type
Reference: streamable-transport-url-required
Error: validation failed
```
Note in the results above:
- All errors contain the JSON path of the triggering element from
server.json.
- The first three errors are schema errors detected during schema
validation. The `Reference` provided contains an absolute path to the
schema rule that was violated, followed by the full schema path that
enforced that rule (with $ref redirect values substited and enclosed in
square brackets).
- The error messages provided by the existing semantic validators are
exactly the same as the previous error messages those validators
produced.
In the final solution we would remove semantic validators that are
redundant to schema validation (as in number 5 above). We have the
option to use the structured data produced by schema validation to
replace the generic schema validation message with a more descriptive
message if that is an issue (in particular, if the only argument for an
ad-hoc validator is that is produces a better/cleaner message, we would
just move that message creation code to the schema error result
formatter and special case it as opposed to having a redundant
validator).
### What's Next
If this general direction is supported and this PR is accepted, a fast
follow would include:
- Add new validators (infliuenced by observed issues) for both semantic
errors and best practices
- Require passing schema validation (in addition to improved semantic
validation) in order to publish
- Remove existing validation code that is redundant to schema validation
(ensuring error messages remain intelligible)
- Update validation client code and tests to handle the new rich return
types natively
### Issues
Schema validation requires embedding the `server.schema.json` file into
the validators package via `go:embed`, which is restricted from
embedding files outside of the package. For this reason we copy the
schema file into a schema subdir (via a prep target in the makefile) and
we .gitignore it. I tried cleaning up the copy in the make clean target,
but then the linter would complain about the embed target being missing
if it wasn't there during development. I also considered just checking
in the schema file and assuming a separate workflow for updating the
embedded schema file, but it's not clear what that workflow would be or
how it would be maintained. I'm open to a different approach, but the
schema file does need to be embedded somehow for schema validation to
work.
## How Has This Been Tested?
All existing validation tests pass, new tests implemented and all pass.
## Breaking Changes
No breaking changes, no behavior change except new `validate` command
## 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
- [X] I have added or updated documentation as needed
---------
Co-authored-by: GitHub Action <action@github.com>
Prepared by Claude Code, iterated and reviewed by me.
## Summary
This PR releases the server.json schema version `2025-12-11`,
incorporating URL template variables for remote servers from #570.
### What's New
- **URL Template Variables for Remote Servers** - Remote servers can now
define configurable variables in URLs using `{curly_braces}` notation,
enabling multi-tenant deployments.
### Schema Version
- `2025-10-17` → `2025-12-11`
## Release Sequence
1. ~~**First: Merge static repo PR** -
https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/static/pull/11 (publishes schema
to versioned URL)~~
2. **Then: Merge this PR** - Updates registry code to reference the new
schema version
## Changes in This PR
- [x] Update CHANGELOG.md with release notes
- [x] Update `CurrentSchemaVersion` in `pkg/model/constants.go`
- [x] Update schema example URL in `docs/reference/api/openapi.yaml`
- [x] Update schema URL in `pkg/api/v0/types.go`
- [x] Update all documentation examples to use new schema version
- [x] Regenerate `server.schema.json`
## Test Plan
- [x] `make check` passes (lint, schema validation, example validation)
- [x] Unit tests pass for validators and publisher commands
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
This resolves
https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry/issues/738. There are
two issues with the NuGet.org integration today:
1. Change the `registryBaseUrl` for NuGet to
`https://api.nuget.org/v3/index.json`. `https://api.nuget.org` is not
the entry point for our service and is not specific enough.
`https://api.nuget.org/v3/index.json` is the value that users put into
their tooling to connect to our public registry (it is installed by
default in .NET client tooling).
2. Use the service index API to get the URL pattern for package READMEs.
- This URL is not guaranteed to be stable. The service index URL
(`registryBaseUrl`) is, however.
Additionally, I polished up the error messages so various error modes
are clearer. When packages are published to NuGet.org, they take 2-5
minutes to become available due to validations we run.
Some possible states that are now handled and described more helpfully
are:
- Version exists, but the package has no README
- The ID exists, but the version does not
- The ID does not exist at all
There are only 3 authors (me, another MSFT person, and a community
member) explicitly setting the old value. The DB migration will fix the
issue. A future publish will fail with the validation error but the
error message is clear.
`registry type and base URL do not match: 'https://api.nuget.org' is not
valid for registry type 'nuget'. Expected:
https://api.nuget.org/v3/index.json`
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
- Unit tests, new and existing
- Manual test locally
- Set old data in the DB, `docker compose up`, confirm the migration
updates the specific package
## Breaking Changes
Yes, but minimal impact expected, unless there is a dependency on the
specific `https://api.nuget.org` value downstream. I am not aware of any
such dependency, and the new value is more proper and specific.
## 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)
- [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. -->
- [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
-->
For more information about the NuGet API see:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/nuget/api/overview#service-index (I
wrote most of the docs).
Update all documentation to reference the stable `/v0.1/` API version
instead of the development `/v0/` version.
Didn't update internal references (e.g. in admin-only docs) as that
probably make sense to keep pointed at v0 as the "dev" option.
Authored by Claude Code, reviewed by me.
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
This PR reorganizes and extends the existing documentation in
preparation for publishing on https://modelcontextprotocol.io/.
The current plan is for docs to remain in this repo, and be synced to
the `modelcontextprotocol/modelcontextprotocol` whenever necessary
(e.g., accompanying a release of the registry). I have included a script
in
https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/modelcontextprotocol/pull/1725
(`bin/pull-registry-docs.sh`) that can be run manually to perform the
sync.
If we later decide to permanently move the docs to the
`modelcontextprotocol/modelcontextprotocol` repo, that also works.
This PR puts all https://modelcontextprotocol.io/ docs into
`docs/modelcontextprotocol-io/`. Docs outside that subdirectory, such as
`docs/administration/admin-operations.md`, are intended to be accessible
solely via this repo. One major exception is the
`docs/reference/server-json/` subdirectory, which will depend on the
resolution of
https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/modelcontextprotocol/issues/1649.
However, I think we could address that in a follow-up PR.
---------
Co-authored-by: Adam Jones <adamj+git@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Jonathan Hefner
Bob Dickinson
Tadas Antanavicius
Joel Verhagen