feat(kyberforge): execute plugin-to-apm marketplace conversion
Why: ADR-0015 established that Microsoft APM (apm.yml + .apm/) should replace this repo's hand-authored plugin.json/marketplace.json model, with those files becoming compiled output of `apm pack` instead of files edited by hand via the (now-retired) plugin-author/marketplace-author skills. Issue #90 was the deferred execution of that decision, gated on #88 (apm tooling) and #89 (apm-native agent-author/skill-author routing). Implementation notes: - All six plugins (bin, core, git, gitea, kyberforge, lint) now carry apm.yml + .apm/{skills,agents,hooks} as their authoring source. Skills moved with a plain git mv (content-identical across targets). Agents were re-authored, not moved: per ADR-0016, .apm/agents/*.agent.md compiles verbatim to both Claude and Copilot, so plugin-scope agents now carry only name/description/model/source_keys -- no tools: field, no Claude-only knobs (isolation, maxTurns, effort, memory, permissionMode). - Root apm.yml registers all 7 marketplace packages (6 local plus mattpocock-skills as a remote entry) under versioning: per_package, matching this repo's existing independent-plugin-versioning practice. - .claude-plugin/marketplace.json and every plugin's plugin.json are now apm-pack-compiled output, verified against the prior hand-maintained content: same names/descriptions/versions/licenses/authors, only cosmetic serialization differences (JSON key order, owner email vs. url, Unicode escaping). - plugin-author and marketplace-author are retired now that apm-based authoring fully replaces their job; kyberforge bumped 1.3.1 -> 1.4.0 for that removal, and the root marketplace catalog bumped 0.3.1 -> 0.3.2 to match, per the version-bump convention now documented in apm-workflow's reference docs instead of a dedicated script (apm has no native version-bump automation). - Fixed hardcoded pre-.apm/ path assumptions across .pre-commit-config.yaml, .pre-commit-hooks.yaml, scripts/check-scope-walkup-sync.sh, scripts/sync-vale-styles.sh, scripts/check-vale-style-sync.sh, six plugins' root plugin.json (stale skills/hooks/agents pointer fields that check-manifests.sh validates), and several tests/*.bats and tests/*.sh fixtures -- including a bats REPO_ROOT relative-path depth bug (10 files, one extra .apm/ directory level to walk up) and a vale probe-path isolation regression introduced mid-fix. - Corrected empirically-wrong assumptions surfaced this session in apm-workflow/apm-install's own reference docs: `apm marketplace package add` does not accept local paths (only owner/repo remote shorthand -- local packages are registered by editing apm.yml's marketplace.packages[] directly); `apm compile` is a consumer-side AGENTS.md/CLAUDE.md generator, not the plugin.json producer, and hard-fails on skill/agent-only packages without --clean; `apm plugin init <name>` nests a stray subdirectory when run with a positional name arg from inside a same-named directory; no native Copilot marketplace output profile exists; .mcp.json is merged into the compiled plugin.json content-aware and target-scoped, with no dependencies.mcp entry needed for simple passthrough; pipx is the correct pip fallback on externally-managed Python environments. - Renamed agent-author's copilot.agent.md template asset to copilot.agent.md.template so apm compile's recursive *.agent.md glob stops misparsing the placeholder template as a real agent primitive. Impact: plugin.json and marketplace.json are compiled artifacts from here on -- editing them by hand is no longer the workflow; edit apm.yml/.apm/ and run apm pack. CONTEXT.md's Plugin/Plugin marketplace glossary entries reflect this. ADR-0001 is marked superseded, ADR-0006 moot, and ADR-0010 updated for the new .apm/agents/ path (project/user scope unaffected, per ADR-0016). Full local verification: claude plugin validate --strict on all 6 plugins, apm audit --ci, apm marketplace check, check-manifests.sh, and the full test suite (165/165 bats, 13/13 shell scripts) all pass clean. Fixes: #90 Refs: #88, #89 ADR: 0015 ADR: 0016 Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Ub96PyaSRD9BHPktotj1pC
This commit is contained in:
@@ -1,23 +0,0 @@
|
||||
# gitea-files
|
||||
|
||||
Read and write individual files and directory/repository trees in a Gitea repository via the Gitea MCP server.
|
||||
|
||||
## What it does
|
||||
|
||||
This skill handles file-domain operations within the Gitea integration suite: reading a single file's contents, listing one directory level, walking a full repository tree (optionally recursive), creating or updating a file, and deleting a file. It owns the SHA-based optimistic-concurrency pattern that Gitea requires for file writes — the domain's sharpest gotcha — and defers branch creation, commit history, and pull request mechanics to `gitea-branches` and `gitea-prs`.
|
||||
|
||||
## Usage
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
/gitea-files
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Describe the file task: read a file or directory, walk a tree, create/update a file, or delete a file. Provide `owner`/`repo`/branch (or ask the user if not given) — this skill does not resolve them from a git remote itself.
|
||||
|
||||
## Files
|
||||
|
||||
| File | Purpose |
|
||||
|------|---------|
|
||||
| `SKILL.md` | Skill instructions for agents |
|
||||
| `references/examples.md` | Canonical call sequences: branch + file + PR, recovering a missing SHA before an update, deleting a file |
|
||||
| `references/sources.md` | Research sources backing the SHA/concurrency and direct-commit-vs-PR guidance |
|
||||
@@ -1,56 +0,0 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: gitea-files
|
||||
|
||||
description: >
|
||||
Use when reading or writing individual files or directory trees in a Gitea repository via the
|
||||
Gitea MCP server: reading a file's contents, listing a directory, walking a full repository
|
||||
tree, creating a new file, updating an existing file, or deleting a file. Triggers on "read this
|
||||
file from the repo", "what's in this directory", "show me the repo tree", "create/update a file
|
||||
in Gitea", "commit this file to the branch", "delete this file from the repo" — even when the
|
||||
user doesn't say "Gitea" explicitly, as long as the target is a Gitea-hosted repository. Do not
|
||||
use for local filesystem file operations (use Read/Write/Edit), for branch or commit history
|
||||
(use gitea-branches), or for opening a pull request around a file change (use gitea-prs after
|
||||
the file write completes here).
|
||||
|
||||
compatibility: Requires the Gitea MCP server configured with a token scoped to at least
|
||||
write:repository. Tested with a token holding write:issue + write:repository; write:issue
|
||||
is not actually required for any of this domain's five tools.
|
||||
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
category: gitea
|
||||
source_keys:
|
||||
- gitea-mcp-repo
|
||||
- gitea-mcp-slim-go
|
||||
- context7-websites-gitea
|
||||
|
||||
allowed-tools: mcp__gitea__get_file_contents mcp__gitea__get_dir_contents mcp__gitea__get_repository_tree mcp__gitea__create_or_update_file mcp__gitea__delete_file
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Gotchas
|
||||
|
||||
- **A 404 from any read call may actually be a 403 in disguise.** `get_file_contents`, `get_dir_contents`, and `get_repository_tree` all gate on `write:repository` scope, not just read access — some Gitea endpoints return 404 instead of 403 when the token's scope is insufficient, to avoid leaking whether the resource exists. If a read fails with 404 on a path you're confident is correct, check the token's configured scopes before concluding the file or directory doesn't exist.
|
||||
- **SHA is the concurrency token for every write — and it lives at the top level of `get_file_contents`'s response, not nested under `content`.** `create_or_update_file` without `sha` is always treated as a *create*: if the path already exists, Gitea returns HTTP 409. `delete_file` has no optional path at all — omitting `sha` returns HTTP 422. The safe sequence for any update or delete is always: call `get_file_contents` first, read the top-level `sha` field, then pass that exact value to the write call. Never guess or reuse a stale SHA — a mismatched SHA is rejected the same as a missing one.
|
||||
- **A write can also fail because the branch requires signed commits — a separate failure mode from a bad SHA.** `create_or_update_file` and `delete_file` create commits server-side via a bare API token call with no 2FA/PGP context. If the target branch's protection rule requires signed commits, Gitea rejects the write outright — surfaced as a generic 403 or 422, not an error naming "signed commit required," and reads against that same branch keep succeeding right up until you try to write. When a write fails without a clean 409 (missing/stale SHA) or 404 (bad path) explanation, check whether the branch's protection rule requires signed commits before assuming the SHA is wrong and retrying.
|
||||
- **A large `create_or_update_file` payload can hit a reverse-proxy 413 that has nothing to do with Gitea.** `content` is base64-encoded, which inflates the payload ~33% over the raw file size; a 413 is commonly a reverse-proxy body-size limit in front of the Gitea instance, not a Gitea-side rejection. No amount of retrying, or changing the SHA, path, or branch, will fix it — it needs the proxy's config raised, which is outside this skill's or the calling agent's control. Surface that distinction to the user instead of retrying the same call.
|
||||
- **`get_dir_contents` and `get_repository_tree` are not SHA sources for a specific file's write.** `get_dir_contents` entries carry no `sha` at all. `get_repository_tree` entries do carry a `sha` (a blob/tree hash), but fetching it means an extra round trip with no content — `get_file_contents` is the canonical path since it returns the decoded content and the write-ready `sha` in one call.
|
||||
- **`owner` and `repo` are always caller-supplied inputs, never resolved here.** This skill doesn't infer them from a git remote. If invoked directly by a human, ask for them if not stated. If invoked by `gitea-workflow` or an orchestrating agent, expect them to already be resolved and passed in.
|
||||
- **Direct commits to a branch are a first-class action, not a workaround.** Gitea's own web UI defaults to editing files directly against a branch — `create_or_update_file`/`delete_file` used that way is normal, not an API escape hatch to avoid. The SHA-currency requirement above is the actual risk to manage, not the act of committing directly.
|
||||
- **`ref` (reads) vs. `branch_name` (writes) are different parameters for the same concept.** `get_file_contents`, `get_dir_contents`, and `get_repository_tree` (as `tree_sha`) all accept a branch name, tag, or commit SHA to select what to read. `create_or_update_file` and `delete_file` instead take `branch_name` — the branch the commit lands on. Don't conflate the two when chaining a read into a write.
|
||||
- **Content is base64.** `create_or_update_file`'s `content` parameter is base64-encoded file content, not raw text — encode before calling. `get_file_contents`'s response content is likewise base64-encoded (decode after reading), unless `withLines: true` is passed for a numbered-line view.
|
||||
|
||||
## Reading
|
||||
|
||||
- **Single file:** `get_file_contents(owner, repo, ref, path)`. Pass `withLines: true` only when you need line numbers for referencing specific lines (e.g. quoting a snippet back to the user); omit it for a normal content fetch.
|
||||
- **One directory level:** `get_dir_contents(owner, repo, ref, path)` — returns immediate entries only (name, path, type, size), no recursion, no SHA, no content.
|
||||
- **Whole tree:** `get_repository_tree(owner, repo, tree_sha, recursive)` — `tree_sha` accepts a SHA, branch, or tag name despite the name. Set `recursive: true` to walk subdirectories in one call. Response includes `truncated: true` when a page doesn't hold every entry — page through with `page`/`per_page` (default `page: 1`, `per_page: 30`) until you get fewer results than `per_page`.
|
||||
|
||||
## Writing
|
||||
|
||||
- **Creating a new file:** call `create_or_update_file(owner, repo, path, content, message, branch_name)` with `sha` omitted entirely.
|
||||
- **Updating an existing file:** call `get_file_contents(owner, repo, ref: branch_name, path)` first, take the top-level `sha`, then call `create_or_update_file(..., sha: <that value>)`.
|
||||
- **Deleting a file:** call `get_file_contents` first the same way, then `delete_file(owner, repo, path, message, branch_name, sha: <that value>)` — `sha` is required, no create-style fallback exists.
|
||||
- **Creating a new branch as part of the write:** pass `new_branch_name` on `create_or_update_file` to branch off before the commit lands, instead of calling a separate branch-creation step.
|
||||
|
||||
If the change needs review before merging, or targets a protected branch, hand off to `gitea-prs` after the write lands here to open the pull request — this skill's scope ends at the commit.
|
||||
|
||||
If you need the full multi-call sequence rather than the single-call summary above — e.g. branching off as part of a file push ahead of opening a PR, or recovering a SHA you didn't capture earlier — read `references/examples.md`.
|
||||
@@ -1,65 +0,0 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
source_keys:
|
||||
- gitea-mcp-repo
|
||||
- gitea-mcp-slim-go
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Canonical call sequences
|
||||
|
||||
## Push a file to a new branch, then open a PR
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
1. get_repository_tree or get_file_contents on the base branch — only needed if the
|
||||
new file is actually replacing an existing one; skip for a brand-new path.
|
||||
|
||||
2. create_or_update_file
|
||||
owner, repo
|
||||
path: "docs/example.md"
|
||||
content: "<base64-encoded content>"
|
||||
message: "docs: add example"
|
||||
branch_name: "main"
|
||||
new_branch_name: "feat/add-example" ← branches off before the commit lands
|
||||
(sha omitted — this is a new file)
|
||||
|
||||
3. Hand off to gitea-prs to open a PR from "feat/add-example" into "main".
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
`new_branch_name` on `create_or_update_file` replaces a separate branch-creation call — the branch is created and the commit lands on it in one step.
|
||||
|
||||
## Update a file when you don't already have its SHA
|
||||
|
||||
SHA is mandatory for updates. If it wasn't captured earlier in the conversation:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
1. get_file_contents
|
||||
owner, repo
|
||||
ref: "main"
|
||||
path: "docs/example.md"
|
||||
→ read the top-level `sha` field (not content.sha)
|
||||
|
||||
2. create_or_update_file
|
||||
owner, repo
|
||||
path: "docs/example.md"
|
||||
content: "<new base64-encoded content>"
|
||||
message: "docs: update example"
|
||||
branch_name: "main"
|
||||
sha: "<sha from step 1>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Do not guess or omit the SHA — the write either fails (409 on create-path fallback) or is rejected outright.
|
||||
|
||||
## Delete a file
|
||||
|
||||
Same SHA-first pattern, no fallback path:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
1. get_file_contents owner, repo, ref: "main", path: "docs/old-example.md"
|
||||
→ read the top-level `sha` field
|
||||
|
||||
2. delete_file
|
||||
owner, repo
|
||||
path: "docs/old-example.md"
|
||||
message: "docs: remove old example"
|
||||
branch_name: "main"
|
||||
sha: "<sha from step 1>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
@@ -1,46 +0,0 @@
|
||||
# Sources
|
||||
|
||||
## gitea-mcp-repo
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:** Official gitea-mcp repository (v1.3.0); operation/*.go source files documenting all 55 MCP tools, their parameters, and CLI flags.
|
||||
|
||||
**Source:** https://gitea.com/gitea/gitea-mcp
|
||||
|
||||
- **Research doc:** plugins/gitea/docs/research/docs/gitea/sources.md
|
||||
|
||||
**Contributing files:**
|
||||
- SKILL.md (Gotchas, Reading, Writing — tool parameters and SHA/concurrency behavior, cross-checked live against the deployed MCP tool schemas via ToolSearch)
|
||||
- references/examples.md (canonical call sequences)
|
||||
|
||||
## gitea-mcp-slim-go
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:** Slim response shape structs from gitea-mcp source; defines exactly which fields the MCP server returns for files (top-level `sha`, no nested `content.sha`) and directory/tree entries.
|
||||
|
||||
**Source:** https://gitea.com/gitea/gitea-mcp/raw/branch/main/operation/repo/slim.go
|
||||
|
||||
- **Research doc:** plugins/gitea/docs/research/docs/gitea/sources.md
|
||||
|
||||
**Contributing files:**
|
||||
- SKILL.md (Gotchas — top-level `sha` field location, `get_dir_contents`/`get_repository_tree` not being usable SHA sources for a file write)
|
||||
- references/examples.md (SHA-first update/delete sequences)
|
||||
|
||||
## context7-websites-gitea
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:** Official Gitea docs mirror on Context7 (docs.gitea.com content) — confirms direct-commit file editing through the web UI is a first-class, expected workflow rather than an API-only escape hatch.
|
||||
|
||||
**Source:** context7:/websites/gitea
|
||||
|
||||
- **Research doc:** plugins/gitea/docs/research/docs/gitea/sources.md
|
||||
|
||||
**Contributing files:**
|
||||
- SKILL.md (Gotchas — "Direct commits to a branch are a first-class action, not a workaround")
|
||||
|
||||
## context7-gitea-tea-cli
|
||||
|
||||
**Description:** Official `tea` CLI (reference Gitea client) docs on Context7 — practitioner command patterns for issues, PRs, and releases, including semver tag/release conventions, draft/prerelease flags, and release-notes-from-file conventions. Consulted alongside `context7-websites-gitea` while researching `workflow-conventions.md` (both sources contribute to that research doc, backing `gitea-workflow`); its file-command patterns did not end up informing any gitea-files content.
|
||||
|
||||
**Source:** context7:/git_gitea_com/gitea_tea
|
||||
|
||||
- **Research doc:** plugins/gitea/docs/research/docs/gitea/sources.md
|
||||
|
||||
**Contributing files:** (none)
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user