Skip to content

fix: address Anthropic MCP directory blockers - #360

Merged
dodeja merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
cursor/anthropic-mcp-blockers-e8b0
Sep 10, 2026
Merged

fix: address Anthropic MCP directory blockers#360
dodeja merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
cursor/anthropic-mcp-blockers-e8b0

Conversation

@dodeja

@dodeja dodeja commented Sep 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Summary

  • return specific permanent errors for missing resources and invalid ISO 6346 check digits
  • require number in the track_container input schema
  • remove runtime response steering payloads and move chaining hints into tool descriptions
  • replace instructional result fields with factual data only

Context

Addresses Anthropic MCP Directory High Priority review blockers tracked in DEV-12451. The separate Medium-priority Mintlify docs work is intentionally excluded.

Verification

  • npm run test --workspace @terminal49/mcp -- --run (220 tests passed)
  • npm run build --workspace @terminal49/mcp
  • npm run lint --workspace @terminal49/mcp
  • npx tsc --noEmit -p tsconfig.json
Open in Web Open in Cursor 

View with [code]smith Autofix with [code]smith
Need help on this PR? Tag @codesmith-bot with what you need. Autofix is disabled.

Co-authored-by: Akshay Dodeja <dodeja@gmail.com>
@vercel

vercel Bot commented Sep 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project Deployment Actions Updated
api Ready Ready Preview Sep 10, 2026 6:44pm UTC

Request Review

Co-authored-by: Akshay Dodeja <dodeja@gmail.com>
@dodeja
dodeja marked this pull request as ready for review September 10, 2026 18:44
@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Sep 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review Completed 2026-09-10T18:47:44.251915Z a6592c7 Draft marked ready
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: a6592c7d7f

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment on lines +187 to +188
if (!hasValidIso6346CheckDigit(number)) {
throw new ContainerCheckDigitError(number);

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

P1 Badge Respect numberType before validating an ISO check digit

When a caller explicitly supplies numberType: 'bill_of_lading' or 'booking_number', an identifier that happens to match ^[A-Z]{3}[UJZ]\d{7}$ is still treated as an ISO 6346 container and can be rejected before reaching the API. Carrier-prefixed shipment identifiers can share this shape (for example, MSCU1234567), so a valid non-container request may receive a permanent check-digit error. Apply this validation only when the selected or inferred type is actually container.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@linear-code

linear-code Bot commented Sep 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

DEV-12451

@dodeja
dodeja merged commit aa83e1b into main Sep 10, 2026
22 of 23 checks passed
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