Skip to content

Conversation

Seydulla
Copy link
Contributor

@Seydulla Seydulla commented Jul 6, 2025

TLDR

This PR clarifies the behavior of includeTools and excludeTools configuration options for MCP servers in the CLI configuration documentation.

Dive Deeper

Changes

  • Added includeTools description: Added clarification that it creates a whitelist behavior and that all tools are enabled by default when not specified

  • Added excludeTools description: Added note about precedence - excludeTools takes precedence over includeTools

    Testing

  • Documentation changes only - no code changes

Linked issues / bugs

Documentation for #2976 changes

@Seydulla Seydulla requested a review from a team as a code owner July 6, 2025 20:32
Copy link

google-cla bot commented Jul 6, 2025

Thanks for your pull request! It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA).

View this failed invocation of the CLA check for more information.

For the most up to date status, view the checks section at the bottom of the pull request.

Copy link
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Summary of Changes

Hello @Seydulla, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request enhances the security and configurability of Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers by introducing a new option to explicitly exclude certain tools. This allows administrators and users to prevent potentially risky or unwanted tools from being exposed to the model, providing finer-grained control over the available functionalities.

Highlights

  • New Configuration Option: Introduced an excludeTools option within the MCPServerConfig to allow users to specify a list of tool names that should not be exposed by a Model Context Protocol (MCP) server.
  • Tool Filtering Logic: Implemented logic during the MCP tool discovery process to filter out and prevent the registration of tools listed in the excludeTools configuration for a given server, enhancing security.
  • Configuration Merging: Ensured that excludeTools configurations from extensions are properly merged with workspace settings, allowing for a comprehensive list of excluded tools.
  • Documentation Updates: Updated both the CLI configuration and extension documentation to reflect the new excludeTools option, including usage examples for clarity.
  • Comprehensive Testing: Added new unit tests to validate the correct behavior of the excludeTools functionality, covering scenarios with excluded tools, empty lists, and undefined configurations.
Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands.

Feature Command Description
Code Review /gemini review Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary /gemini summary Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment @gemini-code-assist Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments.
Help /gemini help Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist is currently in preview and may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments to provide feedback.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

  1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution.

Copy link
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code Review

This pull request introduces the excludeTools option for MCP server configuration, enhancing security. It includes documentation, unit tests, and addresses issue #3160. To improve robustness, consider validating the excludeTools configuration to prevent potential errors from malformed settings.

@gemini-cli gemini-cli bot added kind/enhancement New feature or request priority/p2 Important but can be addressed in a future release. sub-area/mcp Issues related to the Model Context Protocol (MCP). sub-area/security Issues related to security. labels Jul 6, 2025
@jackwotherspoon
Copy link
Collaborator

This feature has already been merged as part of #2976

However, it looks like documentation was missed in the PR.

@Seydulla do you want to update your PR to be a documentation PR for the new excludeTools capability for MCP configs?

If not I will close this PR and I can put up a docs PR myself, but wanted to give you the option first 😄

@Seydulla
Copy link
Contributor Author

Seydulla commented Jul 7, 2025

This feature has already been merged as part of #2976

However, it looks like documentation was missed in the PR.

@Seydulla do you want to update your PR to be a documentation PR for the new excludeTools capability for MCP configs?

If not I will close this PR and I can put up a docs PR myself, but wanted to give you the option first 😄

Sure, I will update

@Seydulla Seydulla force-pushed the feat/mcp-exclude-tools branch from e7f29a2 to 7ccbab3 Compare July 7, 2025 19:46
@Seydulla Seydulla force-pushed the feat/mcp-exclude-tools branch from 157e057 to 43808ec Compare July 7, 2025 20:09
@Seydulla Seydulla changed the title feat(core): Add excludeTools option for MCP server configuration feat(docs): add documentation for mcp excludeTools and includeTools Jul 7, 2025
@Seydulla
Copy link
Contributor Author

Seydulla commented Jul 7, 2025

@jackwotherspoon updated current PR to be a documentation for #2976 changes

@jackwotherspoon jackwotherspoon changed the title feat(docs): add documentation for mcp excludeTools and includeTools docs: add documentation for mcp excludeTools and includeTools Jul 7, 2025
@gemini-cli gemini-cli bot added status/need-issue Pull request needs to be associated with an issue and removed kind/enhancement New feature or request priority/p2 Important but can be addressed in a future release. sub-area/mcp Issues related to the Model Context Protocol (MCP). sub-area/security Issues related to security. labels Jul 7, 2025
Copy link
Collaborator

@jackwotherspoon jackwotherspoon left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@gemini-cli gemini-cli bot added status/need-issue Pull request needs to be associated with an issue and removed status/need-issue Pull request needs to be associated with an issue labels Jul 7, 2025
@Seydulla Seydulla requested a review from jackwotherspoon July 7, 2025 20:44
@gemini-cli gemini-cli bot added status/need-issue Pull request needs to be associated with an issue and removed status/need-issue Pull request needs to be associated with an issue labels Jul 7, 2025
@gemini-cli gemini-cli bot added status/need-issue Pull request needs to be associated with an issue and removed status/need-issue Pull request needs to be associated with an issue labels Jul 20, 2025
Copy link
Collaborator

@NTaylorMullen NTaylorMullen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you for the contribution @Seydulla and reviews @jackwotherspoon and @swissspidy !

@NTaylorMullen NTaylorMullen dismissed jackwotherspoon’s stale review July 20, 2025 23:11

Author submitted fixes.

@NTaylorMullen NTaylorMullen added this pull request to the merge queue Jul 20, 2025
Merged via the queue into google-gemini:main with commit f4d077c Jul 20, 2025
10 checks passed
thacio added a commit to thacio/auditaria that referenced this pull request Jul 21, 2025
galz10 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 22, 2025
davenportjw pushed a commit to davenportjw/gemini-cli that referenced this pull request Jul 24, 2025
jkcinouye pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 25, 2025
galz10 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 30, 2025
JunYang-tes pushed a commit to JunYang-tes/gemini-cli.nvim that referenced this pull request Aug 9, 2025
Gosling-dude pushed a commit to Gosling-dude/gemini-cli that referenced this pull request Aug 23, 2025
involvex pushed a commit to involvex/gemini-cli that referenced this pull request Sep 11, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
status/need-issue Pull request needs to be associated with an issue
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants