Embed runtime instructions inside the package artifact #118
Replies: 3 comments 10 replies
-
The
I'm not super clear on what this would look like/what information this would have over the |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I think it'd be reasonable to push a convention or spec-driven recommendation that |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
@tadasant - do you expect the We'd like to publish a guide for NuGet + MCP authoring in the next month or so and as part of it I'd like to include a sample How do you/other MCP Registry drivers feel about ecosystem partners (like NuGet) beginning to depend on the current |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Pre-submission Checklist
Your Idea
Today, there are two separate places where information about the MCP server is hosted:
What this means is both pieces have to be in place for the client tooling to make full use of the MCP server.
I propose that the MCP registry supports embedding some part or all of the mcp.json into the published npm/Python/docker package. Currently, client tools "lose" the MCP context if they are not interacting with the MCP registry directly.
Selfish motivation
The reason I am looking at this is because I want NuGet (.NET packages) to be supported as MCP servers like npm/PyPI and I also want to enrich NuGet.org with MCP context, but need something inside the package itself to define what snippet JSON for VS Code looks like. My proposal (very NuGet specific).
Without this idea posted here, I am resorting to scraping the embedded package README.md for MCP server JSON, in the VS Code format (not ideal, feels brittle, needs to be replicated by other package consumers).
Benefits
Enrich registry UI: Allow underlying registries to enrich their browsing or consumption experience to be MCP specific
Standalone execution: Allow for standalone MCP consumption of the underlying package
Leverage existing private registries: Allow for existing private registries (e.g. Artifactory, GitHub Package Registry, Azure Artifacts) to serve npm/PyPI/docker MCP servers
MCP metaregistries could be generated from just the package artifacts
In other words, part of the value of the MCP registry concept isn't central registry at all but instead a specification for how to treat an arbitrary package as an MCP server. Putting the arguments inside of the package resists the temptation of "vendor lock-in" and enables an ecosystem of MCP server package consumption (in addition to this specific central registry).
Open questions:
Concrete proposal
In short, I propose that the mcp.json MAY be included inside the .tar.gz/.zip package that is the underlying npm/Python package and that this is an approach recommended by the MCP team to enable the benefits above. Guidance on how to include on the mcp.json in the package format could be given on a per-ecosystem basis (npm/python/docker instructions).
I am not too confident on this particular way of expressing MCP parameters in the underlying package, but it seems to me that this would be a very good thing if solved somehow.
Scope
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions