Hacktoberfest 2026: le issue che i maintainer hanno segnato per ottobre, aperte e adatte ai principianti. Sfoglia le issue Hacktoberfest

Standardized capabilities

Aperta
#168 5 commenti 2 reazioni 0 assegnatari Vedi su GitHub

I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno

Nessuno ha ancora preso questa issue.

Valutazione

Difficoltà
5/5
Tempo stimato
Più di una settimana
Idoneità per principianti
28/100
Tipo di issue
Funzionalità
Chiarezza
Da chiarire
Stato di attività
Tranquilla
Stack tecnologico
web-dev
Ambito
api

Direzione di ricerca

Start with the issue and the referenced get_weather explainer example, then locate where WebMCP tool definitions are specified in the Bikeshed source. The proposal needs a concrete capability-identifier syntax, compatibility rules, and whether aliases or mappings should be supported. Done means the specification clearly defines how an API declares a standardized capability and how consumers recognize it.

Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.

Descrizione

I know that one of the core promises of MCP (and WebMCP) is that the Magic Computer will work out how to decode the interface documentation to drive it. But that's inefficient and there will be common patterns that evolve. Sites request the same information over and over in ways that are 99% the same.

Can there be a way to annotate an API to say that it conforms to a known, standardized interaction pattern? Even if that pattern is a subset of the API (there might be proprietary additions to it), being able to say "I understand interaction pattern as standardized in X" would be of great value. If WebMCP is about efficiency, this would allow for even greater efficiency.

For example, a site might offer a simple interface switchLightDarkMode() that takes values from ["light", "dark", "detect"]. This could be standardized and given an identifier of some sort. The API could declare that it supports that identifier.

Take the "get_weather" example in the explainer. That's a generic capability provided by many sites. If they collectively decide to standardize, this could be spelled out as a new property on the tool definition. A minimal version would just say "this interface conforms to standard X".

A more sophisticated version would allow the support to be declared despite differences in spelling. If the standard uses "getWeather" rather than "get_weather", there could be rules for mapping from the standard to the true interface.

Tools within the browser might then be able to detect the identifier and activate, connecting to the capability that is exposed. No special parsing of the interface is then required if the "standardized" interface is understood. "Standards" could be the old-fashioned kind, where someone writes a specification. Or maybe they could be a reference to another MCP/tool interface, hopefully one that is widely understood.

Lingua principale
Bikeshed
Stelle
4.7k
Fork
328
Merge medio
2g 15h
PR unite (30g)
16

Preparare l'ambiente

Questo progetto non fornisce container di sviluppo, Dockerfile né guida per i contributori, quindi l'ambiente è a tuo carico: parti dal suo README e consulta la nostra guida al primo contributo per i passaggi generali.

Come iniziare

  1. Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
  2. Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
  3. Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
  4. Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.

Altre issue di webmachinelearning/webmcp

Tutte le issue di webmachinelearning/webmcp

Issue simili

Altre issue su Backend & API Design

Ricevi le nuove issue nella tua casella

Un breve riepilogo di issue GitHub adatte ai principianti.