AI/specs review feedback - #818
Conversation
* clarification for issue 84, 82 in audio profile wg * fix for issue 76 in audio profile wg * Clarification for issue 79 * Clarification for issue 75 * Clarification for issue 74
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think two technical corrections are needed before merging:
-
On the client side, the protocol peer of the MCP Server is an MCP Client, not the MCP Host. The Host is the surrounding application that creates and manages one or more MCP Clients. I suggest changing “Protocol Layer — MCP Host” to “Protocol Layer — MCP Client”; the outer box can remain “VMS / MCP Host.”
-
notifications/messagecannot be used for continuous analytics metadata delivery in MCP 2026-07-28. It is a request-scoped logging notification and must not be delivered on asubscriptions/listenstream. We should therefore remove it from the Event Plane and either retain an ONVIF event/metadata transport or explicitly define an ONVIF MCP extension for metadata subscriptions.
I would also clarify that “AI Skills” are ONVIF capabilities exposed through MCP Tools, since Skill is not itself an MCP protocol primitive, and change “OAuth2 JWT over TLS” to “OAuth 2.1 bearer access token (JWT) over TLS.”
|
Cant find doc/issues/event-plane-delivery-model.md Diagram The Skill note names experimental methods skills/list and skills/get. The experimental MCP work is explicitly non-official and currently considers competing approaches; the first-class proposal uses skills/list and skills/activate, while another approach uses Resources. It would be safer to omit proposed method names. [Experimental Skills over MCP] https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/experimental-ext-skills Definitions still say Control Plane (Bus A) and Event Plane (Bus B) although “Bus” was removed everywhere else. MCP Host / Client should ideally be two definition entries because they are deliberately distinct roles. |
|
@sujithhanwha did you really mean to push 02d2afb to this branch? I wonder if you targeted the wrong branch |
Resolved. |
|
@bsriramprasad I had to to some heavy editing on the ai.xml file to get ready for the WG AI call tomorrow. Could you please rebase your branch on top of AI/specs? I plan not to edit it for the next 36 hours... |
@ocampana-videotec there is a whole lot that got changed.. resolving conflict is as much as rewriting, I tried my best though, please check and merge before the base diverges again :-D |
I would want to include my review feedback as fixes to contribute towards #809 and hence changes are targeted to the PR branch
AI Spec Review Changes Summary (PR #818)
Scope & Terminology
Diagram (stack_overview.svg)
Definitions (Terms and Definitions)
Overview Chapter
Building Blocks (MCP Section)
server/discoverresponse, not a standalone concept. Combined both sections into one coherent unit covering transport, versioning, server/discover, and stateless model.server/discoveris a protocol-level lifecycle method, not a primitive or tool call. Cross-references the Protocol Version section.Architecture & Building Blocks Relationship
Communication Planes
Discovery
Deprecated MCP Features Identified (NOT FIXED — separate discussion)
notifications/messageused for metadata event delivery (14 occurrences): In MCP 2026-07-28,notifications/messageis request-scoped logging only (and the entire Logging feature is deprecated per SEP-2577). The correct server-push mechanism issubscriptions/listen. This is an architectural design decision left for wider group discussion.initializeexample in annex: Kept as informative for now.doc/issues/event-plane-delivery-model.mdcontains the full problem statement, five alternative solutions with flow diagrams, comparison matrix, and ONVIF parallel mappings for group discussion.Identity & Authorization
MCP Host vs Client Distinction
Diagram Label Corrections
Skill Terminology Disambiguation
skills/list,skills/get,skill://) which is under development via the Skills Over MCP Working Group and not yet part of MCP core.