MCP Notes

# MCP Notes Active Context ## Current Work Focus The current focus is on preparing for the v0 alpha release of MCP Notes. This includes: 1. **Documentation Finalization**: Ensuring all documentation is complete, accurate, and up-to-date for the alpha release. 2. **Code Cleanup**: Removing test files, unused code, and ensuring a clean codebase for the release. 3. **Bug Fixes**: Addressing known issues, particularly around error handling and path validation. 4. **Release Preparation**: Creating necessary release artifacts and configuration examples. ## Recent Changes 1. **Test Files Removal**: Removed test files and directories to clean up the codebase for the alpha release. 2. **Progress Documentation Update**: Updated progress.md to reflect current status and removed outdated issues. 3. **Active Context Update**: Updated activeContext.md to focus on alpha release preparation. 4. **Bug Fixes**: Fixed issues mentioned in the progress documentation. ## Next Steps 1. **Testing Improvements**: - Create a manual test script for testing tools - Add more comprehensive error handling tests - Test with different note directory structures 2. **Feature Enhancements**: - Consider adding categorization to notes - Explore options for metadata tracking - Improve rollup summarization 3. **User Experience Improvements**: - Enhance error messages for better user feedback - Improve template customization options - Add more examples to documentation ## Active Decisions and Considerations ### Categorization Approach We've been considering different approaches to note categorization: 1. **Frontmatter**: Using YAML frontmatter for metadata - Pros: Structured, compatible with tools like Obsidian - Cons: More formal, requires understanding YAML syntax 2. **Inline Tags**: Using hashtags within note content - Pros: Simple, familiar to users - Cons: Can clutter content, less structured 3. **Section Headers**: Using markdown headers for categorization - Pros: Clean, visible in rendered markdown - Cons: Less flexible, harder to query programmatically 4. **Separate Metadata**: Storing metadata in separate files - Pros: Keeps notes clean, highly flexible - Cons: More complex implementation, potential sync issues Current decision: Focus on simplifying the existing implementation before adding categorization features. ### Conversation vs. Logging We've been discussing the balance between conversational features (rubber ducking) and simple logging: 1. **Conversational Approach**: - Pros: More interactive, better for problem-solving - Cons: More complex, limited by MCP protocol constraints 2. **Simple Logging**: - Pros: Frictionless, straightforward implementation - Cons: Less helpful for problem exploration Current decision: Maintain the simple logging approach for now, as it aligns better with MCP protocol limitations and provides immediate value. ### Template Customization We're considering how to handle template customization: 1. **User-Editable Templates**: Allow users to edit templates directly - Pros: Maximum flexibility - Cons: Potential for breaking changes 2. **Configuration-Based**: Use configuration options to customize templates - Pros: More controlled, less error-prone - Cons: Less flexible Current decision: Start with user-editable templates for maximum flexibility, with clear documentation on template variables and structure. ## Implementation Challenges 1. **MCP Protocol Limitations**: The one-way communication model of MCP makes implementing true conversational features challenging. 2. **File System Concurrency**: Ensuring safe concurrent access to note files without implementing complex locking mechanisms. 3. **Cross-Platform Compatibility**: Ensuring the server works consistently across different operating systems and file systems. 4. **Error Recovery**: Implementing robust error recovery to prevent data loss in case of failures. ## Current Priorities 1. **Alpha Release**: Preparing all necessary components for the v0 alpha release. 2. **Documentation**: Finalizing comprehensive documentation for users and developers. 3. **Code Quality**: Ensuring clean, well-organized, and maintainable code. 4. **Stability**: Addressing known issues to provide a reliable alpha release.