limit tool name length

[DougieHauser]

Describe your changes

Resolves #64

Attempts to filter tools whose operation_id + server name are too long.

Note: The codebase seems to have logic overlap between the functions server.py/_filter_tools and convert.py/def convert_openapi_to_mcp_tools - I didn't want to rock the boat too much on my first attempted contribution, but I would be happy to try my luck at refactoring (perhaps in a separate ticket).

Issue ticket number and link (if applicable)

#64

Screenshots of the feature / bugfix

Checklist before requesting a review

• [V] Added relevant tests
• [V] Run ruff & mypy
• [V] All tests pass

[shira-ayal]

First of all - thank you so much for contributing!
I had a few comments on the code itself, but also wanted to remark on the implementation in general.

I think hard-coding skipping on tools is not a good practice - even if some clients don't accept long tool names, it's not something defined by the spec so we shouldn't enforce it for all MCPs.
It will be better to implement by configuring the max length as an optional argument when generating the MCP based on the FastAPI app, roughly like this:

mcp = FastApiMCP(app, max_tool_name_length=60)

(with max_tool_name_length default to None).

Would be happy to see these changes implemented and then approve!

Regarding your note - it will be best to open an Issue (assigned to yourself) and then implement in a separate PR :)

Thanks again for your contribution!

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 68.75000% with 5 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
fastapi_mcp/server.py	78.57%	3 Missing ⚠️
fastapi_mcp/openapi/convert.py	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

[shahar4499]

I think syncing tadata-org:main latest changes back to your branch would resolve test coverage issues

[DougieHauser]

@shahar4499 - Thanks, I rebased my branch with the "upstream" repo but couldn't get the codecov bot to run again.

I then tried to push a "dummy commit" in order to trigger it, but again, no such luck.

Is there anything I'm missing?

Thanks.

[shira-ayal]

Nice!
Can you address the small notes I commented?
Other than that, looks fine by me

[DougieHauser]

Hey @shira-ayal, just pinging to see if there are any more expected changes.
Thanks.

[shira-ayal]

Hi @DougieHauser !
Looks great, waiting for @shahar4499 to take a final look before we merge :)

[DougieHauser]

Hi @DougieHauser !
Looks great, waiting for @shahar4499 to take a final look before we merge :)

Hey @shahar4499, just a quick ping. Thanks.