pipebrain-mcp 0.19.0 → 0.21.0

package/dist/main.js

@@ -16920,7 +16920,11 @@ async function resolveDeliverableTargetId(client2, projectKey, ref) {
 function createMcpServer(client2, apiBaseUrl, orgInstructions2 = /* @__PURE__ */ new Map(), opts = {}) {
   const surface = opts.surface ?? "local";
   const server2 = new McpServer({ name: "pipebrain", version: opts.version ?? DEFAULT_VERSION }, {
-    instructions: withGeneralInstructions(successorNotice() + `Pipebrain MCP server, bound to the ${apiBindingLabel(apiBaseUrl)} API at ${apiBaseUrl}. Every tool reads and writes THAT environment \u2014 confirm it is the one you intend (a local dev API vs production) before mutating. Tools are namespaced by this server's registration name in .mcp.json (e.g. pipebrain-local:* vs pipebrain:*).`, orgInstructions2)
+    instructions: withGeneralInstructions(successorNotice() + `Pipebrain MCP server, bound to the ${apiBindingLabel(apiBaseUrl)} API at ${apiBaseUrl}. Every tool reads and writes THAT environment \u2014 confirm it is the one you intend (a local dev API vs production) before mutating. Tools are namespaced by this server's registration name in .mcp.json (e.g. pipebrain-local:* vs pipebrain:*).
+
+Technical decisions are yours. Inside an approved requirement you choose the design, the libraries, the structure, and the sequencing. Do not ask, do not report the choice, and do not seek ratification for it. Escalate on consequence, not on uncertainty: a choice that changes what a user sees, costs money, or contradicts an approved requirement is filed as a question with the options you propose, and everything else you decide and carry on. A technical choice worth keeping is recorded as a decision record, never as a paragraph.
+
+Every loose end has one destination, and none of them is prose. Anything you notice that is not the work in front of you goes to exactly one of three places: a question, when the operator has to choose; a new issue at triage, when it is real work outside this item\u2019s scope; or nowhere. Drop it unless it clears the bar for one of the first two \u2014 nowhere is the default, and it is the right outcome whenever knowing the thing would change nothing anyone does. Never open a section called notes, caveats, observations, things to know, or next steps in a body or a comment. Filing is the report: an item recorded and then repeated in prose asks the operator to triage it twice.`, orgInstructions2)
   });
   const registerTool = (name, config3, cb) => server2.registerTool(name, { ...config3, description: decorateDescription(name, config3.description ?? "", orgInstructions2) }, cb);
   registerTool("list_projects", {
@@ -17046,11 +17050,11 @@ 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, howTo} 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. A `manual` criterion must also carry `howTo` \u2014 one or two sentences, not an essay, saying where to look, what to do, and what counts as passing for whoever checks it by hand. Writing or changing one without it is refused (`how_to_required`); so is supplying it on an `auto` criterion, which a machine checks. 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, howTo} 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. The bar for filing a bug: file `type: bug` only when the observed behavior breaks an approved requirement or a defined acceptance criterion, and name which one before you file. If you cannot name one, this is not a bug \u2014 code you find unclear, an edge case nobody specified, a performance number nobody set, and anything you would phrase as "this could be better" are opinions about the product, so file each as `type: feedback`, or not at all. The bar exists because a queue holding both real defects and unshared taste has to be read entirely before any of it can be trusted. 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. Before assigning any verification mode, establish what this project can drive end to end \u2014 an end-to-end test harness and the command that runs it. A criterion is `auto` when an evaluator can drive the input and read the result against the running system, which includes behavior shown in the interface wherever such a harness exists; the mode follows from what can be driven, not from where the behavior appears. What qualifies a criterion as `auto` is the evaluator\u2019s own run, never the existence of a test the implementer wrote. Mark `manual` only when the verdict needs a person\u2019s judgment; a criterion you cannot describe as drivable is usually worded too vaguely, so reword it against the observable rather than fall back to a person. A `manual` criterion must also carry `howTo` \u2014 one or two sentences, not an essay, saying where to look, what to do, and what counts as passing for whoever checks it by hand. Writing or changing one without it is refused (`how_to_required`); so is supplying it on an `auto` criterion, which a machine checks. 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. 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. A `manual` criterion must also carry `howTo` \u2014 one or two sentences, not an essay, saying where to look, what to do, and what counts as passing for whoever checks it by hand. Writing or changing one without it is refused (`how_to_required`); so is supplying it on an `auto` criterion, which a machine checks. 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. The bar for promoting to a bug: choose `type: bug` only when the reported behavior breaks an approved requirement or a defined acceptance criterion, and name which one. If you cannot name one, promote it as `task` \u2014 or leave it as feedback. A queue holding both real defects and unshared taste has to be read entirely before any of it can be trusted. 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. Before assigning any verification mode, establish what this project can drive end to end \u2014 an end-to-end test harness and the command that runs it. A criterion is `auto` when an evaluator can drive the input and read the result against the running system, which includes behavior shown in the interface wherever such a harness exists; the mode follows from what can be driven, not from where the behavior appears. What qualifies a criterion as `auto` is the evaluator\u2019s own run, never the existence of a test the implementer wrote. Mark `manual` only when the verdict needs a person\u2019s judgment; a criterion you cannot describe as drivable is usually worded too vaguely, so reword it against the observable rather than fall back to a person. A `manual` criterion must also carry `howTo` \u2014 one or two sentences, not an essay, saying where to look, what to do, and what counts as passing for whoever checks it by hand. Writing or changing one without it is refused (`how_to_required`); so is supplying it on an `auto` criterion, which a machine checks. 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
@@ -17093,7 +17097,7 @@ function createMcpServer(client2, apiBaseUrl, orgInstructions2 = /* @__PURE__ */
     inputSchema: linkBlockerInputSchema.shape
   }, (args) => run(() => client2.removeBlocker(args.issue, args.blocker)));
   registerTool("set_criteria", {
-    description: "Epic only: define or replace the ordered acceptance criteria list ({text, verification, howTo}). Matched rows keep their stable AC-{n} number; new items get fresh never-reused numbers; removed items are soft-deleted. A matched row keeps its state only when BOTH its text and verification mode are unchanged \u2014 a mode flip resets it to pending (\xA77). 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. A `manual` criterion must also carry `howTo` \u2014 one or two sentences, not an essay, saying where to look, what to do, and what counts as passing for whoever checks it by hand. Writing or changing one without it is refused (`how_to_required`); so is supplying it on an `auto` criterion, which a machine checks. Criteria live on epics only: a task cannot carry a criteria list and instead states in its own body what would count as done.",
+    description: "Epic only: define or replace the ordered acceptance criteria list ({text, verification, howTo}). Matched rows keep their stable AC-{n} number; new items get fresh never-reused numbers; removed items are soft-deleted. A matched row keeps its state only when BOTH its text and verification mode are unchanged \u2014 a mode flip resets it to pending (\xA77). Before assigning any verification mode, establish what this project can drive end to end \u2014 an end-to-end test harness and the command that runs it. A criterion is `auto` when an evaluator can drive the input and read the result against the running system, which includes behavior shown in the interface wherever such a harness exists; the mode follows from what can be driven, not from where the behavior appears. What qualifies a criterion as `auto` is the evaluator\u2019s own run, never the existence of a test the implementer wrote. Mark `manual` only when the verdict needs a person\u2019s judgment; a criterion you cannot describe as drivable is usually worded too vaguely, so reword it against the observable rather than fall back to a person. A `manual` criterion must also carry `howTo` \u2014 one or two sentences, not an essay, saying where to look, what to do, and what counts as passing for whoever checks it by hand. Writing or changing one without it is refused (`how_to_required`); so is supplying it on an `auto` criterion, which a machine checks. Criteria live on epics only: a task cannot carry a criteria list and instead states in its own body what would count as done.",
     inputSchema: setCriteriaInputSchema.shape
   }, (args) => run(() => client2.setCriteria(args.issue, args.criteria)));
   registerTool("set_criterion_state", {
@@ -17372,7 +17376,7 @@ function loadMcpConfig() {
 }
 
 // src/version.ts
-var VERSION = "0.19.0";
+var VERSION = "0.21.0";
 
 // src/main.ts
 var config2 = loadMcpConfig();

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "pipebrain-mcp",
-  "version": "0.19.0",
+  "version": "0.21.0",
   "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",