Skip to content

docs: clarify remote-only ownership verification - #1687

Merged
rdimitrov merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/remote-only-followups
Oct 6, 2026
Merged

rdimitrov merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/remote-only-followups

Conversation

@rdimitrov

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Summary

Follow-up to #1674, covering the remaining gaps from #1656.

  • remote-servers.mdx: new "Ownership Verification" section. The Registry verifies control of the namespace in name, but no authentication method (GitHub, DNS, HTTP) verifies control of the remote URL. Suggests DNS/HTTP authentication when the URL is on a domain you control. Also documents that each remote URL can belong to only one server name (validateNoDuplicateRemoteURLs).
  • Quickstart: notes that mcp-publisher init always generates a packages entry (it defaults to npm), which remote-only servers must replace with remotes.
  • Quickstart: remote-only publishers can skip the Node.js prerequisite as well as npm.
  • Quickstart: removes the duplicate 100-character description note. The Step 4 note remains, and remote-only readers pass through Step 4.

Validation

  • go run tools/validate-examples/main.go
  • git diff --check

Follow-up to #1674.

- Document in remote-servers.mdx that no authentication method verifies
  control of the remote URL, and that each remote URL can belong to only
  one server name
- Note that `mcp-publisher init` always generates a `packages` entry that
  remote-only servers must replace with `remotes`
- Tell remote-only publishers they can skip the Node.js prerequisite
- Drop the duplicate description-length note from the remote-only section

Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
@rdimitrov
rdimitrov merged commit 40a4d7b into main Oct 6, 2026
7 checks passed
@rdimitrov
rdimitrov deleted the docs/remote-only-followups branch October 6, 2026 06:44
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.

1 participant