aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/mcp/README.md
AgeCommit message (Collapse)Author
2026-10-15mcp: pi-chrome-mcp joins the fork as sz-chrome-remote-extension, loading the ↵Igor Soarez
fork's own extension
2026-10-02pi: native MCP instead of pi-mcp-adapterIgor Soarez
pi 0.99+ ships MCP as a built-in, and the adapter suppresses it. The gate moves from the adapter's approval event, which the built-in never emits, to pi's own tool_call hook on mcp__<server>__*, which every call passes through, codemode included. approveTools went with the adapter, so nothing backs the gate up: a decision it cannot reach now denies rather than throws. server.mjs also treats a client named plain "pi" as pi, which is how the built-in introduces itself. From change request 562974, filed from the work laptop.
2026-09-25ship the pi side we actually run, not a different arrangementIgor Soarez
The README told pi users to install pi-chrome directly and run /chrome authorize every session. That is not how this is used: pi reaches the same MCP server through pi-mcp-adapter, with pi's own pi-chrome switched off, which is why nobody types /chrome authorize. pi/browser-gate.ts is that setup's missing piece, generalised from the one in use: it answers pi-mcp-adapter's approval broker for one server, asking once per session instead of once per call (the adapter's own grant only covers identical arguments, so for a browser it asks nearly every time). /browser authorize, /browser revoke, and PI_BROWSER_AUTHORIZE for headless runs. approveTools stays on in mcp.json as the backstop if the gate does not load. The README now leads with that: install the adapter, register the server in mcp.json, copy the gate. Installing pi-chrome in pi is kept as the alternative, with what it costs - two definitions of the browser, /chrome authorize per session, and the trap of loading the extension twice. Tested on an isolated pi config against a stand-in browser: with PI_BROWSER_AUTHORIZE the call reaches the browser, without it the gate denies it.