feat(plugin-mcp): adds select API with CRUD tools#15301
Conversation
📦 esbuild Bundle Analysis for payloadThis analysis was generated by esbuild-bundle-analyzer. 🤖
Largest pathsThese visualization shows top 20 largest paths in the bundle.Meta file: packages/next/meta_index.json, Out file: esbuild/index.js
Meta file: packages/payload/meta_index.json, Out file: esbuild/index.js
Meta file: packages/payload/meta_shared.json, Out file: esbuild/exports/shared.js
Meta file: packages/richtext-lexical/meta_client.json, Out file: esbuild/exports/client_optimized/index.js
Meta file: packages/ui/meta_client.json, Out file: esbuild/exports/client_optimized/index.js
Meta file: packages/ui/meta_shared.json, Out file: esbuild/exports/shared_optimized/index.js
DetailsNext to the size is how much the size has increased or decreased compared with the base branch of this PR.
|
|
Thanks @kendelljoseph! One small follow-up: it could be very useful if the create, update, and delete tools also supported the select parameter, similar to find. Use case: an agent updates a document but does not need the full document payload in the response. Being able to explicitly limit the returned fields would reduce payload size and unnecessary token usage, especially in larger schemas. |
DanRibbens
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do the docs need to be updated to include the new select arg?
I think chore is underselling it, could be convinced it is a fix for missing it in the first place or feat for net new capabilities. WDYT?
|
@jhb-dev yea, I'll go ahead and add select throughout. @DanRibbens yea, I am not sure what to label "it's new to me!" type fittings in this. We certainly want full API support where it makes sense, so do we label each addition a fix until its a 1:1? Or are those feats because its new to this data interaction experience? I'm leaning more toward feat at the moment. Hold on full approval of this until I add select to create/update/deletes today. Then the a more accurate PR would be something like |
|
Typical workflow is to get up to feature parity in more cumulative approach and not as piecemeal. At least that is what we've done in things like ecommerce plugin, though other features like folders comes to mind as something that got gradual improvements until stable. No right or wrong, but I would probably use |
|
🚀 This is included in version v3.73.0 |
Goals
MCP Tools effected:
Discussion: #14921