Skip to content

feat: make agents to be able include all tools from mcp tool server #753

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

sarco3t
Copy link

@sarco3t sarco3t commented Aug 14, 2025

Allow agents to automatically include all tools from an MCP Tool Server, simplifying configuration and ensuring new tools are available without manual updates.

@sarco3t sarco3t marked this pull request as draft August 14, 2025 15:19
@@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ type McpServerTool struct {
// The names of the tools to be provided by the ToolServer
// For a list of all the tools provided by the server,
// the client can query the status of the ToolServer object after it has been created
ToolNames []string `json:"toolNames,omitempty"`
ToolNames []string `json:"toolNames"`
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why did you remove omitEmpty? This just makes the field required. Now you would have to put toolNames: []. Is that intentional?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why did you remove omitEmpty? This just makes the field required. Now you would have to put toolNames: []. Is that intentional?

Yes, it's intentional as I made [] to be equal to include all tools from mcp server
to agent, i guess it might not be the optimal or line-up with yours
architecture, so I'm seeking for the advice how to line-up that feature
with it. As it might be pretty useful for small tool servers, and with
automating binding tools/toolservers to the agent.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants