Document Bomly MCP server#229
Conversation
|
Warning Review limit reached
Next review available in: 22 minutes Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available. How can I continue?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews. How do review limits work?CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability. For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window. Please refer docs for additional details. Review details⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (3)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThis PR adds a new documentation file, docs/MCP.md, describing how to run Bomly as a local MCP server (setup, tools, security, troubleshooting), and updates README.md, docs/GETTING_STARTED.md, docs/README.md, and docs/manifest.json to link to and reference this new guide. ChangesMCP Server Documentation
Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~5 minutes Possibly related PRs
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
Bomly Diff SummaryCompared Overview
Dependency Changes✅ No dependency changes. Vulnerabilities✅ No vulnerability changes. License Changes✅ No license changes. Project Posture✅ No project posture changes ( Policy Findings✅ No policy differences were identified. |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
docs/MCP.md (1)
92-105: 📐 Maintainability & Code Quality | 🔵 Trivial | ⚡ Quick winAdd an explicit ecosystem-coverage note.
The page covers setup, semantics, output shape, and limitations, but it never states which ecosystems the MCP server covers. The docs guideline for
docs/**/*.mdasks for explicit ecosystem coverage; a short note linking toSUPPORT_MATRIX.mdor saying it matches the CLI would close that gap.🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate. In `@docs/MCP.md` around lines 92 - 105, The MCP tools section in MCP.md is missing an explicit ecosystem-coverage note. Add a short statement near the tool table or response-shape summary that says which ecosystems Bomly’s MCP server supports, and reference SUPPORT_MATRIX.md or note that it matches the CLI coverage. Use the existing tool names like bomly_scan, bomly_explain, and bomly_diff to place the note alongside the documented capabilities.Source: Coding guidelines
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@docs/MCP.md`:
- Around line 98-100: The MCP docs are advertising the unsupported `container`
alias for `bomly_scan` and `bomly_diff`, which does not match the actual server
surface. Update the tool-argument tables in `docs/MCP.md` to reflect the real
inputs exposed by `internal/mcp/server.go` for `bomly_scan`, `bomly_explain`,
and `bomly_diff`, and remove `container` from the documented accepted
parameters.
---
Nitpick comments:
In `@docs/MCP.md`:
- Around line 92-105: The MCP tools section in MCP.md is missing an explicit
ecosystem-coverage note. Add a short statement near the tool table or
response-shape summary that says which ecosystems Bomly’s MCP server supports,
and reference SUPPORT_MATRIX.md or note that it matches the CLI coverage. Use
the existing tool names like bomly_scan, bomly_explain, and bomly_diff to place
the note alongside the documented capabilities.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro Plus
Run ID: 82d5879d-e244-4daa-8f2c-72313294dbc1
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
README.mddocs/GETTING_STARTED.mddocs/MCP.mddocs/README.mddocs/manifest.json
…codex/document-mcp-server
1 participant
Summary
Adds a dedicated public MCP server guide for Bomly CLI and wires it into the existing docs navigation.
Changes
docs/MCP.mdwith setup snippets for Claude Code, Cursor, and VS Code.Validation
go run ./cmd/bomly mcp serve --helpgo test ./internal/mcp ./internal/cli -run 'Mcp|MCP'git diff --checkmake testNote: the first
make testrun hit transient Java readiness timeouts in Gradle/Maven/sbt detector tests. The affected packages passed when rerun directly, and the fullmake testrerun passed.Summary by CodeRabbit