Problem Statement
The MCP architecture requires every CLI leaf to have exactly one hierarchy-owned MCP inventory disposition. The workflow hierarchy has no _mcp.py inventory today, so a new workflow leaf can be added without a reviewable decision about MCP exposure. Adding an entry only for workflow.definition would still leave every existing workflow leaf unaccounted for.
Proposed Solution
Create workflow-owned MCP inventory and parity coverage for every registered specify workflow CLI leaf. For each operation, record whether it is available, unavailable, or excluded, with an explicit reason whenever it is not available.
Do not create MCP adapters merely to satisfy inventory parity. Add first-class typed adapters only where the underlying shared operation and MCP contract are ready. workflow.definition is CLI-only today and must receive its explicit disposition as part of the complete hierarchy inventory.
Alternatives Considered
Add only a workflow.definition inventory entry. This was rejected because it would still violate the architecture rule requiring exactly one disposition for every workflow CLI leaf, while creating a misleading partial inventory.
Component
Specify CLI (initialization, commands)
AI Agent
Not applicable; this is cross-agent CLI and MCP architecture.
Use Cases
- A maintainer adds a workflow CLI leaf and can see whether it has an MCP adapter, is intentionally excluded, or remains unavailable.
- A parity test prevents workflow CLI and MCP exposure decisions from silently diverging.
- Future workflow MCP tools can be added incrementally without centralizing command-specific contracts outside the workflow hierarchy.
Acceptance Criteria
Additional Context
The architecture requires explicit hierarchy inventory and parity: design/mcp.md:203-243 and design/cli.md:409-432. The artifact hierarchy provides the current reference implementation.
Copilot review finding on PR #4912: #4912 (comment)
AI Disclosure
Filed and updated by Markus Wondrak with OpenCode (github-copilot/gpt-5.6-terra), default reasoning, autonomous mode. The agent reviewed the MCP architecture and artifact inventory pattern, drafted the issue, and updated it to match the repository feature-request template; no claim of human line-by-line review is made.
Problem Statement
The MCP architecture requires every CLI leaf to have exactly one hierarchy-owned MCP inventory disposition. The
workflowhierarchy has no_mcp.pyinventory today, so a new workflow leaf can be added without a reviewable decision about MCP exposure. Adding an entry only forworkflow.definitionwould still leave every existing workflow leaf unaccounted for.Proposed Solution
Create workflow-owned MCP inventory and parity coverage for every registered
specify workflowCLI leaf. For each operation, record whether it isavailable,unavailable, orexcluded, with an explicit reason whenever it is not available.Do not create MCP adapters merely to satisfy inventory parity. Add first-class typed adapters only where the underlying shared operation and MCP contract are ready.
workflow.definitionis CLI-only today and must receive its explicit disposition as part of the complete hierarchy inventory.Alternatives Considered
Add only a
workflow.definitioninventory entry. This was rejected because it would still violate the architecture rule requiring exactly one disposition for every workflow CLI leaf, while creating a misleading partial inventory.Component
Specify CLI (initialization, commands)
AI Agent
Not applicable; this is cross-agent CLI and MCP architecture.
Use Cases
Acceptance Criteria
workflows/_mcp.pyor an equivalently hierarchy-owned module inventories every workflow CLI leaf exactly once.Additional Context
The architecture requires explicit hierarchy inventory and parity:
design/mcp.md:203-243anddesign/cli.md:409-432. The artifact hierarchy provides the current reference implementation.Copilot review finding on PR #4912: #4912 (comment)
AI Disclosure
Filed and updated by Markus Wondrak with OpenCode (
github-copilot/gpt-5.6-terra), default reasoning, autonomous mode. The agent reviewed the MCP architecture and artifact inventory pattern, drafted the issue, and updated it to match the repository feature-request template; no claim of human line-by-line review is made.