pipebrain-mcp 0.17.0 → 0.18.0

package/dist/main.js

@@ -17035,22 +17035,22 @@ function createMcpServer(client2, apiBaseUrl, orgInstructions2 = /* @__PURE__ */
     inputSchema: { issue: issueRefSchema }
   }, (args) => run(() => client2.getIssue(args.issue)));
   registerTool("create_issue", {
-    description: 'Create an issue (epic/task/bug/feedback). Omitted status defaults to triage (still subject to \xA76 guards); omitted environment resolves explicit \u2192 parent\u2019s environment \u2192 project default (prod). Optional parent (self/cycle rejected), priority, milestone, requirement_links (pins each at its approved revision; a target with no approved revision is rejected), deliverable_links (content deliverables like DWB-C3/bsky \u2014 pins each at its current revision; the promotion path), and ordered {text, verification} criteria (\xA77). Search before you create: `list_issues` takes a `text` filter \u2014 run it on the distinctive nouns first. Sessions do not see each other, so a duplicate is invisible until someone finds both; on a near match, comment or amend the existing record rather than filing again. Link another record by key plus title on first mention; never paste its text into a body \u2014 the source changes, the copy does not, and a stale copy gets built. A decision you need from the operator is filed as a question via `ask_questions`, never written as an "Open questions" heading inside a body \u2014 a heading prompts nobody and records no answer, so a later session cannot tell whether the decision was made. A criterion may be `auto` (machine-checkable) only when an evaluator can drive the input and read the result against the running system unaided \u2014 an existing test covering it does not make it auto; default to `manual` when unsure. Criteria live on epics only: a task cannot carry a criteria list and instead states in its own body what would count as done. Cross-cutting requirements bind every epic automatically and arrive with `get_issue` \u2014 never restate them in a body and never add them to `requirement_links`; an explicit link pins the linked document\u2019s approved revision.',
+    description: 'Create an issue (epic/task/bug/feedback). Omitted status defaults to triage (still subject to \xA76 guards); omitted environment resolves explicit \u2192 parent\u2019s environment \u2192 project default (prod). Optional parent (self/cycle rejected), priority, milestone, requirement_links (pins each at its approved revision; a target with no approved revision is rejected), deliverable_links (content deliverables like DWB-C3/bsky \u2014 pins each at its current revision; the promotion path), and ordered {text, verification} criteria (\xA77). A `status` other than `triage` or `killed` REQUIRES `milestone` (PIPE-R10 rule 9): work past triage belongs to a release, and the create is refused (`milestone_required`) without one. Search before you create: `list_issues` takes a `text` filter \u2014 run it on the distinctive nouns first. Sessions do not see each other, so a duplicate is invisible until someone finds both; on a near match, comment or amend the existing record rather than filing again. Link another record by key plus title on first mention; never paste its text into a body \u2014 the source changes, the copy does not, and a stale copy gets built. A decision you need from the operator is filed as a question via `ask_questions`, never written as an "Open questions" heading inside a body \u2014 a heading prompts nobody and records no answer, so a later session cannot tell whether the decision was made. A criterion may be `auto` (machine-checkable) only when an evaluator can drive the input and read the result against the running system unaided \u2014 an existing test covering it does not make it auto; default to `manual` when unsure. Criteria live on epics only: a task cannot carry a criteria list and instead states in its own body what would count as done. Cross-cutting requirements bind every epic automatically and arrive with `get_issue` \u2014 never restate them in a body and never add them to `requirement_links`; an explicit link pins the linked document\u2019s approved revision.',
     inputSchema: createIssueInputSchema.shape
   }, (args) => run(() => client2.createIssue(args)));
   registerTool("promote_feedback", {
-    description: 'Promote a FEEDBACK issue into a NEW epic or task (PIPE-143): creates the issue in the feedback\u2019s project (`title` + `type` required; omitted environment inherits the FEEDBACK\u2019s environment, not the project default; optional status/body/priority/milestone/requirement_links/criteria as in create_issue), records the feedback as its permanent source (`promotedFrom`/`promotedTo` on both details), closes the feedback as done, and comments the new key on it. The feedback\u2019s own title/body are never touched \u2014 write the new issue\u2019s body as real work, do not paste the feedback in. Rejected (409) for non-feedback, terminal, or already-promoted sources. Returns the created issue. Search before you promote: `list_issues` takes a `text` filter \u2014 run it on the feedback\u2019s distinctive nouns first; an issue covering it may already exist, and sessions do not see each other. On a near match, comment on or amend the existing issue rather than promoting a duplicate. Link another record by key plus title on first mention; never paste its text into a body \u2014 the source changes, the copy does not, and a stale copy gets built. A decision you need from the operator is filed as a question via `ask_questions`, never written as an "Open questions" heading inside a body \u2014 a heading prompts nobody and records no answer, so a later session cannot tell whether the decision was made. A criterion may be `auto` (machine-checkable) only when an evaluator can drive the input and read the result against the running system unaided \u2014 an existing test covering it does not make it auto; default to `manual` when unsure. Criteria live on epics only: a task cannot carry a criteria list and instead states in its own body what would count as done. Cross-cutting requirements bind every epic automatically and arrive with `get_issue` \u2014 never restate them in a body and never add them to `requirement_links`; an explicit link pins the linked document\u2019s approved revision.',
+    description: 'Promote a FEEDBACK issue into a NEW epic or task (PIPE-143): creates the issue in the feedback\u2019s project (`title` + `type` required; omitted environment inherits the FEEDBACK\u2019s environment, not the project default; optional status/body/priority/milestone/requirement_links/criteria as in create_issue), records the feedback as its permanent source (`promotedFrom`/`promotedTo` on both details), closes the feedback as done, and comments the new key on it. The feedback\u2019s own title/body are never touched \u2014 write the new issue\u2019s body as real work, do not paste the feedback in. Rejected (409) for non-feedback, terminal, or already-promoted sources. Returns the created issue. A `status` other than `triage` or `killed` REQUIRES `milestone` (PIPE-R10 rule 9), exactly as in create_issue; the SOURCE feedback needs none to be closed by the promotion. Search before you promote: `list_issues` takes a `text` filter \u2014 run it on the feedback\u2019s distinctive nouns first; an issue covering it may already exist, and sessions do not see each other. On a near match, comment on or amend the existing issue rather than promoting a duplicate. Link another record by key plus title on first mention; never paste its text into a body \u2014 the source changes, the copy does not, and a stale copy gets built. A decision you need from the operator is filed as a question via `ask_questions`, never written as an "Open questions" heading inside a body \u2014 a heading prompts nobody and records no answer, so a later session cannot tell whether the decision was made. A criterion may be `auto` (machine-checkable) only when an evaluator can drive the input and read the result against the running system unaided \u2014 an existing test covering it does not make it auto; default to `manual` when unsure. Criteria live on epics only: a task cannot carry a criteria list and instead states in its own body what would count as done. Cross-cutting requirements bind every epic automatically and arrive with `get_issue` \u2014 never restate them in a body and never add them to `requirement_links`; an explicit link pins the linked document\u2019s approved revision.',
     inputSchema: {
       issue: external_exports.string().min(1),
       ...promoteFeedbackInputSchema.shape
     }
   }, ({ issue: issue2, ...fields }) => run(() => client2.promoteFeedback(issue2, fields)));
   registerTool("update_issue", {
-    description: 'Update any subset of an issue\u2019s title, body, type, priority, milestone, environment, parent (self/cycle rejected), requirement_links (add/remove; adding a link to an unapproved requirement is rejected), deliverable_links (add/remove content-deliverable links, add pins at the current revision), or decision_links (add/remove decision records this work sits under \u2014 `KEY-D{n}`, from `list_decisions`). Changing type away from epic is rejected while the epic has criteria (\xA77). Cite the decision record a piece of work implements rather than restating what was decided in its body: the record is where the reasoning stays correct, and a body repeating it goes stale the moment the decision is superseded. Link another record by key plus title on first mention; never paste its text into a body \u2014 the source changes, the copy does not, and a stale copy gets built. A decision you need from the operator is filed as a question via `ask_questions`, never written as an "Open questions" heading inside a body \u2014 a heading prompts nobody and records no answer, so a later session cannot tell whether the decision was made. Cross-cutting requirements bind every epic automatically and arrive with `get_issue` \u2014 never restate them in a body and never add them to `requirement_links`; an explicit link pins the linked document\u2019s approved revision.',
+    description: 'Update any subset of an issue\u2019s title, body, type, priority, milestone, environment, parent (self/cycle rejected), requirement_links (add/remove; adding a link to an unapproved requirement is rejected), deliverable_links (add/remove content-deliverable links, add pins at the current revision), or decision_links (add/remove decision records this work sits under \u2014 `KEY-D{n}`, from `list_decisions`). Changing type away from epic is rejected while the epic has criteria (\xA77). Clearing `milestone` (passing null) is rejected while the issue sits past `triage` \u2014 work already scheduled keeps a milestone (PIPE-R10 rule 9); swap it for a different one, or move the issue back to `triage` first. Cite the decision record a piece of work implements rather than restating what was decided in its body: the record is where the reasoning stays correct, and a body repeating it goes stale the moment the decision is superseded. Link another record by key plus title on first mention; never paste its text into a body \u2014 the source changes, the copy does not, and a stale copy gets built. A decision you need from the operator is filed as a question via `ask_questions`, never written as an "Open questions" heading inside a body \u2014 a heading prompts nobody and records no answer, so a later session cannot tell whether the decision was made. Cross-cutting requirements bind every epic automatically and arrive with `get_issue` \u2014 never restate them in a body and never add them to `requirement_links`; an explicit link pins the linked document\u2019s approved revision.',
     inputSchema: updateIssueInputSchema.shape
   }, ({ issue: issue2, ...fields }) => run(() => client2.updateIssue(issue2, fields)));
   registerTool("set_status", {
-    description: "Set an issue\u2019s status; \xA76 epic guards apply and a guard failure returns the specific reason (verify needs every auto criterion passed; done needs every criterion passed; both need at least one criterion to exist, naming the unmet ones) (\xA77). A BLOCKED issue \u2014 one carrying an explicit mark or waiting on a blocker that is not yet `done`/`killed` \u2014 cannot move to `ready` or `in_progress`, and the refusal names the reason and every unresolved blocker, so clear the mark (`clear_blocked`) or finish, kill or `unlink_blocker` each blocker first; every other target still moves while blocked.",
+    description: "Set an issue\u2019s status; \xA76 epic guards apply and a guard failure returns the specific reason (verify needs every auto criterion passed; done needs every criterion passed; both need at least one criterion to exist, naming the unmet ones) (\xA77). A BLOCKED issue \u2014 one carrying an explicit mark or waiting on a blocker that is not yet `done`/`killed` \u2014 cannot move to `ready` or `in_progress`, and the refusal names the reason and every unresolved blocker, so clear the mark (`clear_blocked`) or finish, kill or `unlink_blocker` each blocker first; every other target still moves while blocked. An issue with NO milestone cannot move to any status but `triage` and `killed` (PIPE-R10 rule 9) \u2014 set one with `update_issue` first; `killed` is exempt, so work nobody scheduled can still be abandoned.",
     inputSchema: setStatusInputSchema.shape
   }, (args) => run(() => client2.setStatus(args.issue, args.status)));
   registerTool("claim_issue", {
@@ -17361,7 +17361,7 @@ function loadMcpConfig() {
 }
 
 // src/version.ts
-var VERSION = "0.17.0";
+var VERSION = "0.18.0";
 
 // src/main.ts
 var config2 = loadMcpConfig();

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "pipebrain-mcp",
-  "version": "0.17.0",
+  "version": "0.18.0",
   "description": "Pipebrain MCP server for Claude Code and Claude Desktop — issues, requirements, content, assets, and metadata-only secrets over the Pipebrain API.",
   "type": "module",
   "license": "MIT",