Skip to content

Conversation

@raujaiswal
Copy link

@raujaiswal raujaiswal commented Jul 7, 2025

πŸš€ What's New

πŸš€ Automated Build Failure Investigation

One-click workflow: Download β†’ Extract β†’ Analyze in a single command
Eliminates manual steps: No need to manually download, save, and extract ZIP files
Instant access: Build logs ready for investigation within seconds

MCP Tools Added

Build Tools

  • build_get_logs_zip - Enhanced build logs with ZIP extraction and VS Code integration

Tool Description:
Downloads build logs as ZIP, extracts with nested archive support, creates analysis guide, and opens in VS Code for comprehensive build failure investigation.

GitHub issue number

Associated Risks

Replace by possible risks this pull request can bring you might have thought of

βœ… PR Checklist

  • I have read the contribution guidelines
  • I have read the code of conduct guidelines
  • Title of the pull request is clear and informative.
  • πŸ‘Œ Code hygiene
  • πŸ”­ Telemetry added, updated, or N/A
  • πŸ“„ Documentation added, updated, or N/A
  • πŸ›‘οΈ Automated tests added, or N/A

πŸ§ͺ How did you test it?

Replace with use cases tested and models used

@raujaiswal raujaiswal changed the title added build_get_logs_zip tool added tool build_get_logs_zip Jul 7, 2025
@raujaiswal raujaiswal force-pushed the build_get_logs_zip branch from 7c9d924 to c923743 Compare July 7, 2025 08:58
@danhellem danhellem added the Do Not Merge ❌ do not merge this pull request label Jul 7, 2025
@danhellem danhellem self-assigned this Jul 7, 2025
@danhellem
Copy link
Contributor

@raujaiswal we need to put together some prompts on how this would work. Ideally a video as well so people can follow along. My concern with adding this tool is that we don't have anyone else asking for it. And once the tool is out there, it is harder to take away.

Copy link
Contributor

@danhellem danhellem left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We should also be adding and updating tests

@danhellem
Copy link
Contributor

@aaudzei and @kboom can you please review this and make sure it is good.

@kboom
Copy link
Contributor

kboom commented Jul 8, 2025

Thanks for the contribution! In this case, though, I think the approach is too complex and introduces significant local side effects in the tool calls. The MCP server is intended to run reliably in any environment, but this solution would fail if VS Code isn't installed, among other potential issues. Maintaining this setup would likely be costly. It's better to keep things simple. If the goal is for the agent to analyze logs, we should equip it with MCP tools designed to get these logs (in parts) and provide tailored MCP prompts for this use case so they can be used effectively.

@danhellem danhellem closed this Jul 8, 2025
@danhellem danhellem added the Not Implemented ✈️ not going to implement the pull request or issue label Sep 10, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Do Not Merge ❌ do not merge this pull request Not Implemented ✈️ not going to implement the pull request or issue

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants