Skip to main content

report-issue-local

File a bug or feature request against this MCP server's own repo. Use for server-specific issues — tool logic, service integrations, config problems, or domain bugs that aren't caused by the framework.

Aller à l'installation

Informations de source

Dépôt
cyanheads/mcp-ts-core
Dernière activité de la source
13 septembre 2026 à 21:14
Langue détectée de SKILL.md
anglais
Étoiles
151
Forks
29

Options d'installation

Le prompt qui vérifie d'abord la source est sélectionné par défaut. Vous pouvez passer à une commande directe ou télécharger une copie locale.

Vérifiez les fichiers source

Lisez SKILL.md et les fichiers associés affichés par SkillsMP avant de décider de l'installer.

Affichage de SKILL.md

SKILL.md
Instructions source · Aperçu en lecture seule
name
report-issue-local
description
File a bug or feature request against this MCP server's own repo. Use for server-specific issues — tool logic, service integrations, config problems, or domain bugs that aren't caused by the framework.
metadata
{"author":"cyanheads","version":"1.9","audience":"external","type":"workflow"}
## When to Use The bug is in this server's code, not in `@cyanheads/mcp-ts-core`. Typical triggers: - A tool handler returns wrong results or throws on valid input - A service integration (external API, database, third-party SDK) fails or misbehaves - Server-specific config (`server-config.ts`) rejects valid env vars or has wrong defaults - Resource handlers return stale, incomplete, or incorrect data - Domain logic errors — wrong calculations, missing edge cases, bad state transitions - Missing or incorrect `.describe()` on schema fields causing poor LLM tool use **If the issue is in the framework itself** (builders, Context, utilities, type exports, linter), use `report-issue-framework` instead. For general `gh` CLI workflows outside issue filing (PRs, workflows, API access), see the `github-cli` skill. ## Before Filing 1. **Identify the repo**: ```bash gh repo view --json nameWithOwner -q '.nameWithOwner' ``` 2. **Search existing issues** — if a close match exists (same symptom, different tool; same tool, different symptom; closed issue that might cover the new case), add a comment on that issue instead of filing a new one — unless the symptom or scope is distinct enough to warrant separate tracking: ```bash gh issue list --search "your error message or keyword" --state all # Assess a close match before commenting — is it already linked to a fix or referenced elsewhere? gh issue view <number> --comments gh api 'repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/<number>/timeline' --paginate \ --jq '.[] | select(.event=="cross-referenced") | .source.issue | "\(.repository.full_name)#\(.number) — \(.title)"' ``` 3. **Reproduce the issue** — confirm it's reproducible. Note the exact input, transport mode, and any relevant env vars. 4. **Check logs** — review `ctx.log` output and any framework telemetry for clues. If running HTTP, check the response body for structured error details. ## Writing Well-Structured Issues Good issues are scannable, concrete, and self-contained — terse and fact-dense. Default to one or two sentences per bullet; if a bullet runs long, split it or cut it. These patterns apply to both bugs and features — the guidance targets any prose block (Description, Additional context, feature proposals). - **Lead with specifics.** Name the tool, service, resource, or symptom. "Currently `search_docs` returns an empty array for queries containing `&`" beats "Search is broken." A reader should know what's wrong before the end of the first sentence. - **Embed library/service links on first mention.** `[Hono](https://hono.dev/)`, `[Supabase](https://supabase.com/)`. Link to the canonical repo or homepage so readers can verify the dependency and reach docs in one click. - **Use `owner/repo#N` for cross-repo issue references.** GitHub auto-renders them as linked references (e.g. `cyanheads/mcp-ts-core#46`). Bare `#N` only works for same-repo issues — useful when the bug depends on or relates to a framework issue. - **Add a `Related: #N` line** near the top when the issue grows from prior context (discussions, other issues, PRs). Makes provenance clickable. - **Cite cross-references once per body.** Link an issue/PR in `Related:`, the description, or Additional context — not all three. The reader sees them all; redundant linking dilutes signal. - **Lead design sections with a philosophy sentence.** Bold a short principle before the tradeoff details — e.g. "Philosophy: **return best-effort data, don't fail the tool call on parsing edge cases.**" Establishes the lens for the rest of the section. - **Prefer Markdown tables for comparisons.** When showing options, data sources, strategies, or tradeoffs — tables are the highest-density format for scanning N rows × M attributes. - **Separate `### Scope` from `### Out of scope`.** The latter is as important as the former — it pre-empts scope-creep debates in comments and signals you've thought about the boundaries. - **Use `Depends on: owner/repo#N`** to declare ordering explicitly when implementation is blocked on an upstream framework change or another issue landing first. - **Cut what dilutes the signal.** Mechanism walkthroughs (link the PR or doc instead), ceremonial framings ("This issue covers…"), conversation references ("as discussed", "per offline"), and kitchen-sink Additional context blocks. If a paragraph isn't pulling weight, drop it. - **Skip collaborator-framing sign-offs.** Lines like "Happy to open a PR", "let me know if you'd like", "willing to contribute", "if that's the preferred flow" read as noise. A PR link beats an offer; if you're the maintainer filing against your own repo, the offer is redundant. End the body at the last substantive point. ## Redact Before Posting GitHub issues are **public**. Do not include secrets, credentials, API keys, or tokens. Redact sensitive values from env vars, headers, and logs before submitting. Replace with obvious placeholders: `REDACTED`, `sk-...REDACTED`. Do not rely on partial masking — partial keys can still be exploited. ## Filing a Bug This repo includes YAML form issue templates (scaffolded from the framework). Use `--web` to open the form in the browser (preferred when available), or pass `--title` + `--body` for non-interactive use. ### Browser (interactive) ```bash gh issue create --template "Bug Report" --web ``` ### CLI (non-interactive) Structure the `--body` to match the template's form fields: ````bash gh issue create \ --title "bug(tool_name): concise description" \ --label "bug" \ --assignee "@me" \ --body "$(cat <<'ISSUE' ### Server version 0.1.0 ### mcp-ts-core version 0.1.29 ### Runtime Bun ### Runtime version Bun 1.3.x ### Transport stdio ### Description What happened and what you expected instead. ### Steps to reproduce 1. Call `tool_name` with input: `{ "key": "value" }` 2. Observe error / wrong output ### Actual behavior ``` Error or incorrect output here ``` ### Expected behavior What should have happened. ### Additional context Relevant `ctx.log` output, stack traces, or telemetry spans. ISSUE )" ```` ### Title conventions Format: `type(scope): description` - **type:** `bug`, `feat`, `docs`, `chore` - **scope:** tool name, service name, resource name, `config`, `auth`, or domain area Examples: - `bug(search_docs): returns empty results for queries with special characters` - `feat(analytics): add date range filter to usage_report tool` - `docs(setup): .env.example missing REDIS_URL` ### Labels Every issue needs exactly one primary label. Stack secondary labels on top when applicable. **Primary (required — pick one):** | Label | When | |:------|:-----| | `bug` | Something broken | | `enhancement` | New feature or improvement | | `documentation` | Documentation is wrong, missing, or misleading | **Secondary (optional — stack on top of primary):** | Label | When | |:------|:-----| | `regression` | Worked before, broken after a change | | `performance` | Memory, CPU, latency, or resource usage | | `security` | Vulnerability, CVE, or hardening work | | `breaking-change` | Change will break public API; requires a major bump | | `blocked-by-framework` | Fix requires a released change in `@cyanheads/mcp-ts-core`; pairs with a `Depends on: cyanheads/mcp-ts-core#N` line in the body | | `blocked-by-sdk` | Fix requires changes in `@modelcontextprotocol/sdk` | | `surplus-token-idea` | Worth exploring when token budget allows | `blocked-by-framework` comes off when this server adopts the release that ships the fix. An issue blocked on the SDK *through* the framework takes `blocked-by-framework`, not `blocked-by-sdk` — the server's own unblock is still a framework release. Combine labels: `--label "bug" --label "regression"`. Secondary labels are not GitHub defaults — if `gh issue create --label "regression"` fails with `label not found`, create it once: ```bash gh label create regression --color e99695 --description "Worked before, broken after a change" gh label create performance --color 5319e7 --description "Memory, CPU, latency, or resource usage" gh label create security --color b60205 --description "Vulnerability, CVE, or hardening work" gh label create breaking-change --color d93f0b --description "Change will break public API; requires a major bump" gh label create blocked-by-framework --color fbca04 --description "Fix requires a released change in @cyanheads/mcp-ts-core" gh label create blocked-by-sdk --color c5def5 --description "Fix requires changes in @modelcontextprotocol/sdk" gh label create surplus-token-idea --color FF10F0 --description "Worth exploring when token budget allows" ``` ### Attaching logs or large output Note: `--body-file` replaces the entire body — it does not supplement a `--body` flag. For structured bugs with logs, either embed the log content in the `Additional context` section of a normal `--body`, or file the issue first and add the log as a comment: ```bash bun run rebuild && bun run start:stdio 2>&1 | head -200 > /tmp/server-error.log # As part of a new issue (the log becomes the entire body — no template fields) gh issue create \ --title "bug(ingest): crashes on large payload" \ --label "bug" \ --assignee "@me" \ --body-file /tmp/server-error.log # Or as a comment on an existing issue (preferred — keeps the structured body intact) gh issue comment <number> --body-file /tmp/server-error.log ``` ## Filing a Feature Request ### Browser (interactive) ```bash gh issue create --template "Feature Request" --web ``` ### CLI (non-interactive) The first three headings are the Feature Request form's own fields, in its order — `Use case` and `Proposed behavior` are required by the form, so a body without them does not satisfy it. Everything after `Alternatives considered` is supplemental; omit what you don't need — simple requests don't require Flow / Design / Dependencies blocks. ````bash gh issue create \ --title "feat(scope): concise description" \ --label "enhancement" \ --assignee "@me" \ --body "$(cat <<'ISSUE' ### Use case One or two sentences: who hits this gap and why it matters. Name the specific tool, service, resource, or domain area. Kept short on purpose — a field that invites a paragraph gets padded with background and skipped by the next reader. Related: #N ### Proposed behavior What you want the server to do, then the new behavior or surface. For tool/resource changes, show example input/output or the new schema fields. Link external libraries or services on first mention: [lib name](https://github.com/owner/repo). ```ts // Example: new input field or output shape ``` ### Alternatives considered What you tried or evaluated instead, and why it didn't fit. ### Scope - Files or modules touched - New env vars, config keys, or service integrations - New or modified tools / resources / prompts ### Out of scope - What we're deliberately not doing - Adjacent work that belongs in a separate issue ### Flow (optional) Ordered steps — e.g. `request → lookup → fallback → respond`. Useful when the change spans multiple phases or fallbacks. ### Design / Tradeoffs (optional) Philosophy: **one-line principle in bold.** | Option | Strengths | Weaknesses | |:---|:---|:---| | A | ... | ... | | B | ... | ... | ### Dependencies (optional) - Depends on: cyanheads/mcp-ts-core#N (upstream framework change) - Depends on: owner/repo#N (other server work) ISSUE )" ```` ## Triage: Framework vs Server Not sure where the bug lives? Quick checks: | Signal | Likely framework | Likely server | |:-------|:-----------------|:--------------| | Error originates in `node_modules/@cyanheads/mcp-ts-core/` | Yes | | | Error in `src/mcp-server/tools/` or `src/services/` | | Yes | | Same bug reproduces with a bare `tool()` definition (no services) | Yes | | | Bug disappears when you swap in a dummy handler | | Yes | | `ctx.state`, `ctx.log`, `ctx.inputs` behave wrong on any tool | Yes | | | Only one specific tool/resource is affected | | Yes | When genuinely ambiguous, file against this server's repo and note that it might be a framework issue. The maintainer can transfer it upstream. ## Following Up ```bash # View issue details (with comment thread) gh issue view <number> --comments # Add context gh issue comment <number> --body "Additional findings..." # List your open issues gh issue list --author @me # Close if resolved gh issue close <number> --reason completed --comment "Fixed in <commit or PR>" ``` ## Checklist - [ ] Confirmed bug is in server code, not the framework - [ ] Searched existing issues — no duplicate found; close matches commented instead of duplicated - [ ] All secrets, credentials, and tokens redacted - [ ] Title follows `type(scope): description` format - [ ] Primary label assigned (`bug` / `enhancement` / `documentation`) - [ ] If bug: version, runtime, repro steps, actual vs expected behavior included - [ ] If feature: `Use case` and `Proposed behavior` present (the form's required fields), `Alternatives considered` third; Out of scope defined
Voir sur GitHub