Best possible solution:

Accept the backend only after the dashboard/Gateway owners explicitly approve the durable descriptor and authority model, then require exact-head CI before landing it as the prerequisite for the separately scoped UI renderer.

Do we have a high-confidence way to reproduce the issue?

Not applicable as a bug report: this PR adds a new durable MCP App dashboard capability. The supplied focused tests cover the backend behavior, but no failing current-main bug is being claimed.

Is this the best way to solve the issue?

Unclear pending owner intent: server-side descriptor derivation and transcript reminting avoid persisting HTML or tool payloads, but maintainers must decide whether this is the intended permanent Gateway and board-authority contract.

AGENTS.md: unclear because the file could not be read completely.

Codex review notes: model internal, reasoning high; reviewed against 27f05c8993fb.

Label justifications:

• P2: This is a substantial but non-emergency dashboard/MCP capability whose merge needs normal maintainer design review.
• merge-risk: 🚨 compatibility: The PR adds a public Gateway method and persists new MCP App widget metadata that clients and upgrades must interpret consistently.
• merge-risk: 🚨 security-boundary: Restored views can expose interactive MCP App capabilities, making descriptor identity and grant rechecks security-sensitive.
• rating: 🐚 platinum hermit: Overall readiness is 🐚 platinum hermit; proof is 🌊 off-meta tidepool and patch quality is 🐚 platinum hermit.
• status: 👀 ready for maintainer look: ClawSweeper has no concrete contributor-facing blocker left for this PR. Not applicable: This MEMBER-authored backend-only PR is exempt from the external-contributor real-behavior-proof gate; it supplies focused post-change test evidence, while end-user UI proof belongs to the dependent renderer PR.

PR surface:

Source +436, Tests +519, Other +67. Total +1022 across 25 files.

What I checked:

• Protected maintainer feature: The item is authored by a repository MEMBER and carries the maintainer label, so this workflow must keep it open for explicit maintainer handling. (7ed78c78627c)
• Persistent board and Gateway contract: The patch adds the materialized MCP App content form, instance-bound grant parameters, and the board.widget.appView request/result schema; this is an additive public protocol and persisted-board contract. (packages/gateway-protocol/src/schema/board.ts:132, 7ed78c78627c)
• Authority enforcement path: The patch routes interactive MCP App operations through requireMcpAppInteraction, including an authorization callback intended to recheck widget grant state before tool calls and model-context updates. (src/gateway/mcp-app-operations.ts:60, 7ed78c78627c)
• Feature history: The dashboard stitching work was merged in commit 06480d767cefeb6514395930f189a27c5aed8983; its PR description explicitly identified MCP App pinning as remaining program work, making this backend PR an adjacent continuation rather than duplicate work. Public docs: docs/web/dashboard-architecture.md. (docs/web/dashboard-architecture.md:1, 06480d767cef)
• Dependent UI implementation: The open UI implementation at feat(ui): render MCP Apps in dashboard widgets #111585 explicitly depends on this backend contract, so this PR remains necessary rather than superseded. (17dd3215989b)
• Focused validation evidence: The PR body reports 111 focused tests across board protocol, stores, reconstruction, gateway handlers, and MCP operations on the exact head; the supplied check state also shows the Gateway critical-quality and security-sensitive checks succeeding, while broader queued work remains unresolved. (src/gateway/server-methods/board.test.ts:1, 7ed78c78627c)

Likely related people:

• steipete: Authored the merged dashboard stitching PR that established the board/widget program and documented MCP App pinning as remaining work. (role: feature-history contributor; confidence: high; commits: 06480d767cef; files: docs/web/dashboard-architecture.md, src/boards/board-store.ts, src/gateway/server-methods/board.ts)

• 🦀 challenger crab: rare, exceptional readiness with strong proof, clean implementation, and convincing validation.
• 🦞 diamond lobster: very strong readiness with only minor maintainer review expected.
• 🐚 platinum hermit: good normal PR, likely mergeable with ordinary maintainer review.
• 🦐 gold shrimp: useful signal, but proof or patch confidence is still limited.
• 🦪 silver shellfish: thin signal; proof, validation, or implementation needs work.
• 🧂 unranked krab: not merge-ready because proof is missing/unusable or there are serious correctness or safety concerns.
• 🌊 off-meta tidepool: rating does not apply to this item.

Shiny media proof means a screenshot, video, or linked artifact directly shows the changed behavior. Runtime, network, CSP, and security claims still need visible diagnostics.

• ClawSweeper keeps one durable marker-backed review comment per issue or PR.
• Re-runs edit this comment so the latest verdict, findings, and automation markers stay together instead of adding duplicate bot comments.
• A fresh review can be triggered by eligible @clawsweeper re-review comments, exact-item GitHub events, scheduled/background review runs, or manual workflow dispatch.
• PR/issue authors and users with repository write access can comment @clawsweeper re-review or @clawsweeper re-run on an open PR or issue to request a fresh review only.
• Maintainers can also comment @clawsweeper review to request a fresh review only.
• Fresh-review commands do not start repair, autofix, rebase, CI repair, or automerge.
• Maintainer-only repair and merge flows require explicit commands such as @clawsweeper autofix, @clawsweeper automerge, @clawsweeper fix ci, or @clawsweeper address review.
• Maintainers can comment @clawsweeper explain to ask for more context, or @clawsweeper stop to stop active automation.

• reviewed 2026-07-19T22:10:25.527Z sha 7026ee4 :: needs maintainer review before merge. :: none