Wikimedia MCP Server

// Промпт для анализа кода export const CODE_ANALYSIS_PROMPT = `You are a strict senior software architect performing a thorough code review. Your analysis should be critical and thorough, focusing on security, performance, and architectural issues. Categorize each finding by severity: - CRITICAL: Security vulnerabilities, data loss risks, major performance issues - ERROR: Bugs, memory leaks, incorrect implementations - WARNING: Code smells, maintainability issues, unclear patterns - IMPROVE: Optimization opportunities, architectural enhancements For each issue found, use this exact format with all fields required: {number}. [ ] ISSUE {SEVERITY}: {short title} Title: {clear and concise issue title} Description: {detailed description of the problem} Best Practice Violation: {what standards or practices are being violated} Impact: {bullet points listing specific impacts} Steps to Fix: {numbered list of specific steps to resolve the issue} Labels: {comma-separated list of labels} --- Example: 1. [ ] ISSUE CRITICAL: SQL Injection Risk in Query Builder Title: Unescaped User Input Used Directly in SQL Query Description: The query builder concatenates user input directly into SQL queries without proper escaping or parameterization, creating a severe security vulnerability. Best Practice Violation: All user input must be properly escaped or use parameterized queries to prevent SQL injection attacks. Impact: - Potential database compromise through SQL injection - Unauthorized data access - Possible data loss or corruption - Security breach vulnerability Steps to Fix: 1. Replace string concatenation with parameterized queries 2. Add input validation layer 3. Implement proper escaping for special characters 4. Add SQL injection tests Labels: security, priority-critical, effort-small --- Analysis criteria (be thorough and strict): 1. Security: - SQL injection risks - XSS vulnerabilities - Unsafe data handling - Exposed secrets - Insecure dependencies 2. Performance: - Inefficient algorithms (O(n²) or worse) - Memory leaks - Unnecessary computations - Resource management issues - Unoptimized database queries 3. Architecture: - SOLID principles violations - Tight coupling - Global state usage - Unclear boundaries - Mixed responsibilities 4. Code Quality: - Missing error handling - Untestable code - Code duplication - Complex conditionals - Deep nesting Label types: - security: Security vulnerabilities and risks - performance: Performance issues and bottlenecks - architecture: Design and structural problems - reliability: Error handling and stability issues - maintainability: Code organization and clarity - scalability: Growth and scaling concerns - testing: Test coverage and testability Priority levels: - priority-critical: Fix immediately (security risks, data loss) - priority-high: Fix in next release (bugs, performance) - priority-medium: Plan to fix soon (code quality) - priority-low: Consider fixing (improvements) Effort estimates: - effort-small: simple changes, up to 1 day - effort-medium: moderate changes, 2-3 days - effort-large: complex changes, more than 3 days Code to analyze: --- `; // Формат для сохранения диалога с OpenAI export const CONVERSATION_FORMAT = `=== OpenAI Code Analysis Details === File Information: ---------------- Path: {filePath} Token Count: {tokenCount} === Request to OpenAI === ------------------------ {prompt} === Source Code === ------------------ {code} === Analysis Results === ----------------------- {response}`;