Hacktoberfest 2026:メンテナが10月に向けて印を付けた、オープンで初心者向けの issue。 Hacktoberfest の issue を見る

`#[tool(description = …)]` accepts only a bare literal, while `#[doc]` and `#[schemars]` on the same items accept `include_str!` and `const` paths

クローズ
#1,175 コメント 0 件 リアクション 0 件 担当者 0 名 GitHub で見る

メンテナーはふだん 3 日以内に返信

まだ誰も着手していません。

評価

難易度
3/5
見積もり時間
1〜2日
初心者へのやさしさ
62/100
issue の種類
機能追加
明瞭さ
おおむね明確
活発さ
静か
技術スタック
rust
領域
api, tooling

調査の方向性

このレポートには実装ファイルやテストが記載されていないため、まず #[tool] 属性パーサーと description に対するその検証を見つけてください。 &'static str の const パスと concat! のカバレッジを追加し、リテラルの動作を維持して、生成された description と文書化された動作またはエラー動作がリクエストに一致することを確認してください。

索引モデルが issue の本文から書いたものです。

説明

P3

Summary

description in #[tool] accepts only a bare string literal. Two attributes that sit on the very same items are more permissive: #[doc] on the function accepts include_str! and that value does reach the published description, and #[schemars(extend(…))] on the argument struct accepts const paths.

So a server can already source a tool's published text from outside the attribute — through #[doc], or through a literal handed in by a wrapper macro — just not through description, which is the field that names it. Accepting a const path and concat! there would remove the inconsistency.

This is an enhancement request, not a blocker: the workarounds below all work.

Version

rmcp 3.1.2, rustc 1.96.1, edition 2024.

What was measured

form result
#[tool(description = "…")] works
#[tool(description = my_crate::caps::TEXT)] error: Unexpected type \path``
#[tool(description = concat!("a", "b"))] error: Unexpected type \macro``
/// doc comment + #[tool] works — becomes the description
#[doc = include_str!("text.md")] + #[tool] works — becomes the description
#[schemars(extend("maximum" = MOST_STARTS_AT_ONCE))] on the args struct works — a const path, in the same attribute stack
doc comment and description together description wins (no surprise here)
macro_rules! wrapping the whole #[tool_router] impl works
macro_rules! wrapping only the fn inside the impl compiles, registers nothing — filed separately

The schemars row is the one that makes this feel like an oversight rather than a decision: a const is already acceptable one attribute away, for a value that is likewise baked into the published schema.

Why it matters on a larger surface

On a server with many tools the published text is an interface, and it usefully has two halves: a short one broadcast in tools/list before the first call, and a longer one fetched on demand. Ours measures 82 953 B of description across 66 tools, against a 13 590 B fetchable handbook — so keeping the split is worth real bytes, and it is far easier to keep the two halves honest when both can be declared together and the short one referenced from the attribute:

// what one would like to write
const GET_OR_CREATE_PROJECT: Capability = Capability {
    broadcast: "…what prevents a wrong call…",
    taught:    "…the full explanation, fetched on demand…",
};

#[tool(description = GET_OR_CREATE_PROJECT.broadcast)]

Today that requires either moving the text into a file and using #[doc = include_str!(…)], or keeping a second copy plus a test comparing it to the literal.

Suggested change

Accept in description what neighbouring attributes already accept: a path to a const &'static str, and concat!. The generated code stores a &'static str either way.

If the literal is required because the value is needed during macro expansion, a line saying so in the docs — and an error message reading "only a string literal is accepted here" rather than naming the token type — would save the next person the experiment.

What this report does not establish

It does not claim the current behaviour is wrong, only that it is inconsistent with #[doc] and #[schemars] on the same items. name was not tested against a non-literal; only description was.

主要言語
Rust
スター
4k
フォーク
654
平均マージ
4日 3時間
マージ済み PR(30日)
40

環境構築

Codespaces で開く

このプロジェクトの開発コンテナを、あなたの GitHub アカウントでブラウザ上に起動します。

はじめの一歩

  1. issue を最後まで読み、次にプロジェクトのコントリビューションガイドを読みます。
  2. 着手することを issue にコメントします — 二人が同じ作業をするのを防げます。
  3. リポジトリをフォークし、ブランチを切って変更します。
  4. issue 番号を参照したプルリクエストを送ります。

modelcontextprotocol/rust-sdk のほかの issue

modelcontextprotocol/rust-sdk の issue をすべて見る

似ている issue

Rust の issue をもっと見る

新しい issue をメールで受け取る

初心者向けの GitHub issue を短くまとめたダイジェスト。