github / github/copilot-sdk

Surface per-server MCP Apps capability on McpServersLoadedServer / SessionMcpServerStatusChangedData

Abierto
#1,675 0 comentarios 0 reacciones 0 asignados Ver en GitHub
enhancement
Lenguaje dominante
Java
Estrellas
10.5k
Forks
1.5k
Merge medio
1 d 11 h
PR fusionados (30 d)
128

Descripción

### Summary

`McpServersLoadedServer` (from `session.mcp_servers_loaded`) and `SessionMcpServerStatusChangedData` (from `session.mcp_server_status_changed`) describe each MCP server's `name`, `status`, `transport`, `source`, plugin info, and `error`, but carry nothing indicating whether that specific server is **MCP Apps (SEP-1865) capable** (i.e. exposes UI resources). A consumer that models capability per server has no direct signal at that granularity.

### Current state

MCP Apps capability is observable at two other granularities today, just not per-server:

- **Session-wide** — `CapabilitiesChangedUI.mcp_apps` ("Whether MCP Apps (SEP-1865) UI passthrough is now supported") and `session_has_mcp_apps`.
- **Per-tool** — tool definition metadata `ui` ("present for MCP tools with MCP Apps support").

The per-server status types, however, expose no equivalent:

```rust
pub struct McpServersLoadedServer {
pub error: Option,
pub name: String,
pub plugin_name: Option,
pub plugin_version: Option,
pub source: Option,
pub status: McpServerStatus,
pub transport: Option,
// no MCP-Apps capability field
}
```

### Consequence

A consumer that wants to advertise, in its own surface, *which configured MCP servers offer App/UI experiences* has to infer it indirectly — e.g. by scanning every tool of every server for `ui` metadata — instead of reading a per-server flag. The capability granularity (session / tool) doesn't line up with a per-server model.

### Suggested fix

Add an optional per-server MCP-Apps capability flag to `McpServersLoadedServer` (and ideally `SessionMcpServerStatusChangedData`), so consumers can read App-capability at the server granularity directly. Alternatively, if the intended model is that App capability is strictly per-tool, documenting that explicitly on these types would resolve the ambiguity.

Guía de contribución

Abrir la guía de contribución

Evaluación

Este issue todavía no se ha evaluado.

Recibe los nuevos issues en tu correo

Un resumen breve de issues de GitHub para principiantes.