approvepath
This server does not currently have a deployable release on Glama. Follow the repository's setup instructions to install and configure it for your MCP client, including any required credentials and local dependencies.
approvepath
A CODEOWNERS file says who is supposed to approve a change. Review history says who actually shows up. approvepath puts the two side by side for one pull request: you hand it the CODEOWNERS rules, the files the PR touches, and whatever past review activity you have, and it hands back, per file, the owners the rules assign and the people who have reviewed that exact file before.
Pattern matching follows a pinned subset of CODEOWNERS
semantics, so the answer never depends on which CODEOWNERS
dialect you had in mind. Any leading / is stripped from both
the pattern and the file path before comparing. A pattern
ending in / is a directory prefix: it matches every file
under that directory. A pattern containing * is a glob that
must match the whole path — ** matches any run of characters
including /, while a single * matches any run except /.
Any other pattern matches a file that equals it exactly, or a
file underneath it (the pattern plus / as a prefix), so a
bare directory name owns its whole subtree.
When several rules match the same file, the last matching
rule in file order wins — the same override rule CODEOWNERS
itself uses, and the reason a broad early rule can hand a
subtree to a team while a later, narrower rule hands one
corner of it back. A file no rule matches is unowned: its
owners list is empty and its pattern is null, and it also
appears in unowned_files, in input order.
Review history is counted plainly. For each changed file,
frequent_reviewers counts, per reviewer, how many supplied
review entries by that reviewer list the file exactly — no
prefix credit, no directory credit. Reviewers are ranked by
count descending, then by name ascending, and only the top
three are reported. required_reviewers collects every owner
from every winning rule across the PR, deduplicated and
sorted, which is the shortest honest answer to "whose
approval does this PR actually need?".
Everything is computed locally from the arguments alone: no repository is read, no hosting API is called, and nothing is guessed. Malformed input — a rule with an empty pattern, a changed file that is not a non-empty string, a review entry missing its reviewer — is a validation error naming the offending path, with no partial result.
CLI
npx @reneturcios/approvepath map --input args.json
npx @reneturcios/approvepath --versionargs.json contains the full arguments object:
{
"codeowners": [
{ "pattern": "src/", "owners": ["@core"] },
{ "pattern": "src/api/", "owners": ["@api-team", "sam"] }
],
"changed_files": ["src/api/handler.ts", "README.md"],
"reviews": [
{ "reviewer": "sam", "files": ["src/api/handler.ts"] },
{ "reviewer": "lee", "files": ["src/api/handler.ts"] }
]
}reviews is optional and defaults to []. The result is
printed as JSON:
{
"files": [
{
"file": "src/api/handler.ts",
"owners": ["@api-team", "sam"],
"pattern": "src/api/",
"frequent_reviewers": [
{ "reviewer": "lee", "reviews": 1 },
{ "reviewer": "sam", "reviews": 1 }
]
},
{
"file": "README.md",
"owners": [],
"pattern": null,
"frequent_reviewers": []
}
],
"unowned_files": ["README.md"],
"required_reviewers": ["@api-team", "sam"]
}Exit codes: 0 on success, 1 on a runtime error (including
an unreadable or invalid input file, or invalid input), 2
on a usage error.
Related MCP server: gemini-pr-reviews
MCP server
npx -y @reneturcios/approvepath mcpMCP client config:
{
"mcpServers": {
"approvepath": {
"command": "npx",
"args": ["-y", "@reneturcios/approvepath", "mcp"]
}
}
}Tools
map_approvals— Map the approval path for a pull request.codeowners(array, required, may be empty) — CODEOWNERS rules in file order; each entry is{pattern, owners}, wherepatternis a non-empty string andownersis an array of non-empty strings (may be empty)changed_files(array of strings, required, non-empty) — paths of the files the PR changesreviews(array, optional, default[]) — past review activity; each entry is{reviewer, files}, whererevieweris a non-empty string andfilesis an array of strings (may be empty)
Returns
{files, unowned_files, required_reviewers}, wherefilesholds one{file, owners, pattern, frequent_reviewers}entry per changed file, in input order.
Docker
docker run -i ghcr.io/cloudcorprecords/approvepath
docker run --rm -v "$PWD:/w" ghcr.io/cloudcorprecords/approvepath map --input /w/args.jsonDevelopment
npm install
npm run build # tsc -> dist/
npm test # tsx --test test/*.test.ts (pure local, no network)
npm run dev # run the CLI from sourceLicense
MIT — Copyright (c) 2026 Rene Turcios
This server cannot be deployed
Maintenance
Related MCP Connectors
Screens public GitHub repos and PRs to generate risk maps, findings, and merge-readiness signals.
Code review for diffs: rule-based checks for leaked secrets, unsafe migrations and more.
Turn described changes into reviewed pull requests: propose, triage, review, dependency audits.
Evaluates any GitHub repository for license risk, maintenance velocity, stars/forks, and security.
Related MCP Servers
- FlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceEnables analysis of GitHub Pull Requests, including details, diff, file lists, and review tracking.3-
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables fetching and analyzing Gemini Code Assist reviews from GitHub pull requests, with smart defaults and pagination.-
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceEnables building structured release evidence by comparing two Git refs and correlating commits, merged pull requests, linked issues, labels, changed files, and contributors.360 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables MCP clients to score a pull request's blast radius from changed files and exported symbol counts, returning risk bands, directory spread, hottest files, and per-directory split suggestions.MIT