docs: update architecture docs for Outfitter stack adoption#172
docs: update architecture docs for Outfitter stack adoption#172galligan wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
|
Warning This pull request is not mergeable via GitHub because a downstack PR is open. Once all requirements are satisfied, merge this PR as a stack on Graphite.
This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking. |
Update AGENTS.md with handlers layer, @outfitter/cli and @outfitter/mcp references. Rewrite docs/mcp.md for 6-tool architecture with defineTool pattern. Update outfitter-patterns.md to reflect completed adoption phases. 🤘🏻 In-collaboration-with: [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
galligan
force-pushed
the
fire-1/docs
branch
from
8825259 to
477682d
Compare
galligan
force-pushed
the
fire-11/mcp-framework
branch
from
c31cf2c to
0e54a57
Compare
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 477682d8ab
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| {"action": "status", "status_short": true} | ||
| {"pr": 42, "action": "edit", "title": "feat: update auth"} | ||
| {"pr": 42, "action": "edit", "draft": true} | ||
| {"pr": 42, "action": "add", "review": "approve", "body": "LGTM"} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The fw_pr schema only allows action values edit, rm, or review (apps/mcp/src/schemas.ts), so the documented "action": "add" payload is invalid and will be rejected during input validation. Any MCP client that copies this example to submit approvals (or similar write operations) will fail before reaching the handler, so the docs should use the currently supported action names.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
| {"action": "list"} | ||
| {"id": "@a7f3c", "action": "view"} | ||
| {"id": "@a7f3c", "body": "Fixed", "resolve": true} | ||
| {"id": "@a7f3c", "action": "ack"} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
fw_fb does not define an action parameter; acknowledgement is triggered by ack: true (FeedbackParamsShape), while unknown keys are ignored. With this example payload, action is dropped and handleCommentFeedback falls back to a view operation, so users expecting an ack will get a silent no-op instead.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
1 participant
Summary
@outfitter/cliand@outfitter/mcpreferencesdocs/mcp.mdfor 6-tool architecture withdefineTool()patterndocs/architecture/outfitter-patterns.mdto reflect completed adoption phases (FIRE-1)Test plan
bun run checkpassesbun testpasses (298 tests)🤘🏻 In-collaboration-with: Claude Code
Greptile Summary
Updated architecture documentation to reflect completed Outfitter stack adoption phases (handlers layer,
@outfitter/cli,@outfitter/mcp). The changes bring documentation in sync with recent refactoring work that introduced the handler contract pattern and framework integration.Major changes:
defineTool()and tool annotations, added handler contract and Result types pattern documentationfw_query,fw_status,fw_doctor,fw_help,fw_pr,fw_fb) withdefineTool()pattern examples and tool annotationsConfidence Score: 5/5
Important Files Changed
@outfitter/cli, and@outfitter/mcpadoption with accurate references to new framework patternsdefineTool()pattern, replacing outdated single-tool action-based documentation with current implementation detailsLast reviewed commit: 477682d