-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 108
fix: Add missing logging for Async MCP Servers #374
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Summary of Changes
Hello @vorburger, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!
This pull request addresses a missing logging capability for asynchronous Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers. It integrates the existing logging consumer into the asynchronous client initialization process, ensuring that all logging messages from these servers are now properly captured. Additionally, it includes a minor refactoring in the logging consumer class to optimize logger instantiation.
Highlights
- Asynchronous Logging Implementation: The pull request introduces a
loggingConsumer
to theMcpAsyncClient
builder, ensuring that logging messages from asynchronous MCP servers are now properly captured and processed. - Logging Consumer Adaptation: A new private static helper method,
asyncMcpServerLogConsumer()
, was created to seamlessly adapt the existing synchronousMcpServerLogConsumer
for use within the asynchronous client's logging mechanism, which expects aFunction
returning aMono<Void>
. - Logger Refactoring: The
McpServerLogConsumer
class was refactored to initialize itsLogger
instance as aprivate static final
field. This change improves efficiency by preventing repeated logger instantiation on everyaccept
call.
Using Gemini Code Assist
The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.
Invoking Gemini
You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command>
or @gemini-code-assist <command>
. Below is a summary of the supported commands.
Feature | Command | Description |
---|---|---|
Code Review | /gemini review |
Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state. |
Pull Request Summary | /gemini summary |
Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state. |
Comment | @gemini-code-assist | Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments. |
Help | /gemini help |
Displays a list of available commands. |
Customization
To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/
folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.
Limitations & Feedback
Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.
You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.
Footnotes
-
Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Code Review
This pull request correctly adds the missing logging for async MCP servers by providing a logging consumer. The changes are functional and address the issue. I've included one suggestion to enhance performance and memory efficiency by reusing consumer instances, given they are stateless and thread-safe. The refactoring in McpServerLogConsumer
to utilize a static logger is also a commendable improvement.
Follow-up to #370.