Fix documentation to use 'meta' instead of '_meta' for MCP spec field#2735
Fix documentation to use 'meta' instead of '_meta' for MCP spec field#2735
Conversation
WalkthroughThis pull request updates documentation across client and server files to reference a public Possibly related PRs
Pre-merge checks and finishing touches✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
✨ Finishing touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro 📒 Files selected for processing (7)
🧰 Additional context used📓 Path-based instructions (3)docs/**/*.mdx📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (docs/.cursor/rules/mintlify.mdc)
Files:
docs/**/*.{md,mdx,json}📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (AGENTS.md)
Files:
docs/**/*.{md,mdx}📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (AGENTS.md)
Files:
🧠 Learnings (5)📚 Learning: 2025-11-26T21:51:44.174ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-11-26T21:52:08.947ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-11-26T21:52:08.947ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-11-26T21:52:08.947ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-11-26T21:52:08.947ZApplied to files:
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (4)
🔇 Additional comments (7)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
The MCP specification uses
metaas the field name, not_meta. While the Python SDK's Pydantic models use_metaas a serialization alias, the Python attribute ismeta. This PR updates all documentation to consistently refer tometawhen discussing the MCP specification and usesmetain code examples.Additionally removes unnecessary
hasattrchecks from meta field examples, sincemetais a standard field on MCP SDK objects (it's just optional/None).Changes:
metafield" instead of "_metafield"metafield is part of the standard MCP specification".metainstead of._metahasattrchecks from meta field examplesExample: