You can easily add as many tools you want: https://gofastmcp.com/servers/tools
I would be surprised if there is a thing you can't do with FastMCP 2.0+ that you can do with the MCP Python SDK. Like I said earlier: This is a simplistic example :) but the gist is we should be using the newer abstractions which I am happy to comment during the development phase too. Like everything else we need to ensure maintainability is worth the value we create. On Fri, 30 May 2025 at 14:48, Kaxil Naik <kaxiln...@gmail.com> wrote: > Btw we don’t need to use FastMCP just for create MCP from OpenApi spec. > Many of you mighht already be aware - FastMCP 1.0 was adopted in the > official mcp python sdk since 1.2 and is recommended high-level server > framework. > > Check: > https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/python-sdk/releases/tag/v1.2.0 > > @Bryan Coder: I will be surprised if you can’t do the use-case you > mentioned with FastMCP - either the one donated to MCP Python SDK or > FastMCP 2.0 - have you tried that? It isn’t just a wrapper! > > On Fri, 30 May 2025 at 13:16, Avi <a...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote: > >> Yeah FastMCP is nice, I didn't select fast mcp for this specific reason: >> - The sheer number of tools that are created using OpenAPI spec doesn't >> need to be passed to AI every single message. >> - Instead, we can do a hierarchical tool discovery based on categories. >> And >> let AI select a particular category and then get tools only for that >> category. >> >> python3 -c " >> > import json >> > with open('path/to/openapi.json') as f: >> > spec = json.load(f) >> > >> > tags = {} >> > for path, methods in spec['paths'].items(): >> > for method, details in methods.items(): >> > if 'tags' in details: >> > for tag in details['tags']: >> > tags[tag] = tags.get(tag, 0) + 1 >> > >> > print('Tags and their counts:') >> > for tag, count in sorted(tags.items(), key=lambda x: x[1], >> reverse=True): >> > print(f'{tag}: {count}') >> > " >> Tags and their counts: >> Task Instance: 19 >> Asset: 13 >> Connection: 8 >> DagRun: 8 >> Backfill: 7 >> DAG: 7 >> Pool: 6 >> Variable: 6 >> XCom: 4 >> Config: 2 >> Event Log: 2 >> Import Error: 2 >> Plugin: 2 >> Task: 2 >> DagVersion: 2 >> Login: 2 >> DagSource: 1 >> DagStats: 1 >> DagReport: 1 >> DagWarning: 1 >> Extra Links: 1 >> Job: 1 >> Provider: 1 >> DAG Parsing: 1 >> Monitor: 1 >> Version: 1 >> >> My last attempt to do a hierarchical discovery with FastMCP didn't go as >> expected. >> But this could be short term. There is something cooking in the model >> context protocol repo for search of a tool. Ref: >> https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/modelcontextprotocol/pull/322 >> >> I'll give this a try with FastMCP to see if I can get the >> hierarchical discovery working. >> >> - Avi >> >> On Fri, May 30, 2025 at 1:33 AM Bryan Corder <bryancor...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > In order to bring value, we might want to think beyond just wrapping the >> > API. As Kaxil just showed, it's easy to create something with 10 lines >> of >> > code and FastMCP. >> > >> > However, the Airflow API was made for Airflow operators' consumption, >> not >> > necessarily for LLM consumption. When you have an endpoint called >> "Delete >> > DAG" with a description "Delete a specific DAG" that's very easy for any >> > user who has already navigated to the Airflow API spec to understand, >> but >> > maybe not the best tool description for an LLM. I think we'd want to >> either >> > exclude that or add additional context for the LLM to know it's >> > destructive. >> > >> > In addition, LLMs can struggle with tool selection when you give it 80 >> > tools to work with. Things in the middle sometimes get lost in the >> context. >> > There are ways to customize the FastMCP ( >> > https://gofastmcp.com/servers/openapi#custom-route-maps) to cut down >> the >> > list of options, should you choose. >> > >> > However, it may be better to create something more tailored to LLMs. >> > Thinking about the use case of getting LLM assistance with debugging a >> > failed run, one of the things my teams do is put the "run book" for prod >> > support in the doc_md notes right with the DAG, so if a file never >> shows up >> > they know exactly what to do in that situation (potentially, do >> nothing). >> > We also include other information like, "xx task can be flaky. If you >> get >> > this error, rerunning it will usually resolve it." The goal is for any >> > engineer armed with the stack trace and the run book to be able to solve >> > any error. My team has all that information right in the UI. To get that >> > information, the LLM would need to know to hit the DAG Details endpoint >> for >> > one minor attribute amongst several for the doc_md and get the correct >> dag >> > id, run id, task id and try number to grab the stack trace from the >> failed >> > run. It would then need to go elsewhere to find the DAG code to debug. I >> > think it would be better to just create a "debug_failed_task" tool an >> LLM >> > could call from an MCP server that would string those calls together and >> > serve them up to the LLM on a silver platter. The LLM could focus all >> its >> > "reasoning" efforts on solving the problem instead of figuring out how >> to >> > get the information it needs to even begin. >> > >> > Again, if we just want to wrap the API in FastMCP, we can share Kaxil's >> 10 >> > lines of code in a Medium article and be done. I think the real value >> is in >> > providing an implementation of a limited set of more complex base tools >> > like debug_failed_task (described above), pause_all_active_DAGs (because >> > I'm about to upgrade!), describe_DAG (grabs only the description, >> > dependencies, converts cron schedule to human readable if applicable, >> etc) >> > and giving people a way to extend the server. >> > >> > The above is tool focused. As Avi pointed out, there are also resources >> and >> > prompts, but I've only personally worked with tools and have nothing to >> add >> > there. >> > >> > With all the LLM tools quickly advancing on the development side (e.g. >> code >> > generation/review), it's great to see the community working on building >> > tools to help with the operational side. >> > >> > Bryan >> > >> > >> > On Thu, May 29, 2025, 4:50 PM Kaxil Naik <kaxiln...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > > One more comment: MCP SDKs have advanced quite a bit and I was able to >> > get >> > > an Airflow MCP Server working with just the following code block. I >> was >> > > successfully able to pause/unpause a DAG from Claude and other MCP >> client >> > > as an example. So as much as possible we should utilize higher level >> > > abstraction like FastMCP which allows creating client from OpenAPI >> spec >> > > <https://gofastmcp.com/servers/openapi#openapi-integration>: >> > > >> > > import os >> > > >> > > import httpx >> > > from fastmcp import FastMCP >> > > >> > > token = os.environ.get("AF_ACCESS_TOKEN") >> > > client = httpx.AsyncClient( >> > > base_url="http://localhost:28080";, >> > > headers={"Authorization": f"Bearer {token}"}, >> > > ) >> > > >> > > openapi_spec = httpx.get("http://localhost:28080/openapi.json >> > ").json() >> > > >> > > mcp = FastMCP.from_openapi( >> > > openapi_spec=openapi_spec, >> > > client=client, >> > > name="Airflow 3.0 API Server" >> > > ) >> > > >> > > if __name__ == "__main__": >> > > mcp.run() >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Thu, 29 May 2025 at 20:32, Avi <a...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote: >> > > >> > > > @Shahar -- Yes. Definitely. Feel free to reachout if you need >> anything. >> > > > >> > > > I totally agree, it to live as a separate repo. >> > > > >> > > > - Avi >> > > > >> > > > On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 12:50 PM Kaxil Naik <kaxiln...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > @Shahar -- Absolutely, I think you are driving it with this email. >> > So I >> > > > > think you can lead it from here and whoever wants to join can >> co-lead >> > > or >> > > > > join in development. >> > > > > >> > > > > Please feel free to drive :) >> > > > > >> > > > > On Thu, 29 May 2025 at 17:07, Aaron Dantley < >> aarondant...@gmail.com> >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > Hey All! >> > > > > > >> > > > > > I’d be grateful to be included in the AIP discussions to help if >> > > > possible >> > > > > > too! Like Shahar, I’ve never worked on any of these items so >> it’d >> > be >> > > > > great >> > > > > > to see how work gets assigned and goes through a whole >> development >> > > > cycle! >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Looking forward to it! >> > > > > > Aaron >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 7:32 AM Shahar Epstein < >> sha...@apache.org> >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > If it's ok, I would like to lead the AIP effort (or at least >> > > > co-lead), >> > > > > as >> > > > > > > I've never written an AIP before. I could start drafting it >> > during >> > > > the >> > > > > > next >> > > > > > > week. >> > > > > > > Avi - please let me know if it works for you. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Shahar >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Thu, May 29, 2025, 13:09 Kaxil Naik <kaxiln...@gmail.com> >> > > wrote: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Yes separate repo, please and we would need someone to lead >> > this >> > > > > effort >> > > > > > > on >> > > > > > > > the proposal & development too. Avi - you are probably well >> > > > equipped >> > > > > to >> > > > > > > > lead it and I am sure more folks like Aaraon would be eager >> to >> > > work >> > > > > on >> > > > > > > its >> > > > > > > > development and on-going maintenance. >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Regards, >> > > > > > > > Kaxil >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On Thu, 29 May 2025 at 15:25, Jarek Potiuk < >> ja...@potiuk.com> >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Yep. Having MCP is cool and drawing our implementation >> from >> > > > > > experiences >> > > > > > > > and >> > > > > > > > > usage of other MCP servers out there is even cooler >> > (especially >> > > > > that >> > > > > > we >> > > > > > > > can >> > > > > > > > > have some insights how people already use them with >> Airflow) >> > - >> > > if >> > > > > we >> > > > > > > can >> > > > > > > > > bring together a few of those, put some nice, relevant >> > Airflow >> > > > > > prompts. >> > > > > > > > > Ideally we could have some examples of how MCP can be used >> > > taken >> > > > > from >> > > > > > > > those >> > > > > > > > > who are using airflow (the debugging example by Avi is >> cool) >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > I am not sure implementing it as provider is really "the >> way" >> > > > > though >> > > > > > - >> > > > > > > I >> > > > > > > > > would rather see `apache-airflow-mcp" separate repo - >> it's so >> > > > > > different >> > > > > > > > and >> > > > > > > > > distinct from airflow it does not really require any of >> > Airflow >> > > > > > > internals >> > > > > > > > > and code to be implemented - it makes very little sense >> to be >> > > the >> > > > > > part >> > > > > > > of >> > > > > > > > > airflow "workspace" where we would develop it together >> with >> > > > > airflow - >> > > > > > > > > because if it will talk over the REST api, all we need is >> the >> > > > > > `client` >> > > > > > > > that >> > > > > > > > > might be just a dependency. And there is even no reason >> for >> > MCP >> > > > and >> > > > > > > > airflow >> > > > > > > > > to be installed and developed together (that's the main >> > reason >> > > > why >> > > > > we >> > > > > > > > want >> > > > > > > > > providers to be kept in monorepo. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > J. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 8:37 AM Amogh Desai < >> > > > > > amoghdesai....@gmail.com> >> > > > > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Seems like a promising area to invest in given the >> benefits >> > > it >> > > > > can >> > > > > > > > > provide >> > > > > > > > > > to >> > > > > > > > > > the users as mentioned by Shahar and Abhishek. >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Abhishek also has a promising talk submitted which i am >> > > looking >> > > > > > > forward >> > > > > > > > > to >> > > > > > > > > > this year at the summit. >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > In any case, this seems to be one of the first of the >> very >> > > few >> > > > > > > > > > implementations of trying >> > > > > > > > > > to integrate Airflow officially / unofficially with an >> MCP >> > > > > server. >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards, >> > > > > > > > > > Amogh Desai >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 2:56 AM Aaron Dantley < >> > > > > > > aarondant...@gmail.com> >> > > > > > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Hey! >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > I also think this is a great idea! >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Would it be possible to be included in the development >> > > > process? >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Sorry I’m new to this group, but would appreciate any >> > > > > suggestions >> > > > > > > on >> > > > > > > > > how >> > > > > > > > > > to >> > > > > > > > > > > contribute to the MCP server development! >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Regards! >> > > > > > > > > > > Aaron >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 28, 2025 at 2:57 PM Avi >> > > > <a...@astronomer.io.invalid >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Nice to see the idea to incorporate an official MCP >> > > server >> > > > > for >> > > > > > > > > > > > Airflow. It's been really magical to see what a >> simple >> > > LLM >> > > > > can >> > > > > > do >> > > > > > > > > with >> > > > > > > > > > an >> > > > > > > > > > > > Airflow MCP server built just from APIs. >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > A few things that I noticed in my experience: >> > > > > > > > > > > > - The number of tools that the OpenAPI spec >> generates >> > is >> > > > > quite >> > > > > > > > huge. >> > > > > > > > > > Most >> > > > > > > > > > > > tools (*Claude, VS Code with GitHub Copilot, Cursor, >> > > > > Windsurf*) >> > > > > > > > which >> > > > > > > > > > > uses >> > > > > > > > > > > > mcp-client limits it to a number of 100 tools. (*The >> > > > > read-only >> > > > > > > mode >> > > > > > > > > > > creates >> > > > > > > > > > > > less tools in comparison*.) >> > > > > > > > > > > > - MCP server are just not tools. There are other >> things >> > > as >> > > > > > well, >> > > > > > > > like >> > > > > > > > > > > > resources and prompts. Prompts are super helpful in >> > case >> > > of >> > > > > > > > debugging >> > > > > > > > > > for >> > > > > > > > > > > > example. It is a way of teaching LLM about Airflow. >> > Say I >> > > > > want >> > > > > > to >> > > > > > > > > have >> > > > > > > > > > a >> > > > > > > > > > > > failing task investigated. A prompt can be helpful >> in >> > > > letting >> > > > > > LLM >> > > > > > > > > know >> > > > > > > > > > a >> > > > > > > > > > > > step-by-step process of carrying out the >> investigation. >> > > > > > > > > > > > - Where do you run the MCP server? I wouldn't want >> my >> > > > laptop >> > > > > to >> > > > > > > do >> > > > > > > > > the >> > > > > > > > > > > > heavy processing, which would want us to go for the >> SSE >> > > > > instead >> > > > > > > of >> > > > > > > > > > stdio. >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > This is why I chose two different path of using mcp >> > > server >> > > > > with >> > > > > > > > > > airflow, >> > > > > > > > > > > > which I intend to talk about at the summit. >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > 1. AI-Augmented Airflow - This helped me add a chat >> > > > interface >> > > > > > > > inside >> > > > > > > > > > > > Airflow using a plugin to talk to an Airflow >> instance >> > > (read >> > > > > > only >> > > > > > > > > mode). >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > 2. Airflow-Powered AI - Experimenting with this has >> > been >> > > > > > totally >> > > > > > > > > > magical, >> > > > > > > > > > > > how powerful AI can become when it has access to >> > airflow. >> > > > > > Also, a >> > > > > > > > > > > directory >> > > > > > > > > > > > structure to maintain the DAGs, and it can write >> DAGs >> > on >> > > > the >> > > > > > > fly. I >> > > > > > > > > > > totally >> > > > > > > > > > > > see a need where LLMs eventually will need a >> scheduler, >> > > > > > although >> > > > > > > a >> > > > > > > > > > > complete >> > > > > > > > > > > > airflow just for an LLM might seem a bit overkill to >> > the >> > > > rest >> > > > > > of >> > > > > > > > the >> > > > > > > > > > > > community. >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > I chose to build this on top of open API is because >> > that >> > > > was >> > > > > > the >> > > > > > > > only >> > > > > > > > > > way >> > > > > > > > > > > > to get proper RBAC enabled. >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > I have so many points to discuss. Would love to hear >> > from >> > > > the >> > > > > > > > > community >> > > > > > > > > > > and >> > > > > > > > > > > > then take it forward. >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > > > > > > > > Avi >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 28, 2025 at 6:32 PM Aritra Basu < >> > > > > > > > > aritrabasu1...@gmail.com> >> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > I definitely think there's potential to interact >> with >> > > an >> > > > > > > airflow >> > > > > > > > > MCP >> > > > > > > > > > > > > server. Though I think I'd be interested to see >> how >> > > many >> > > > > and >> > > > > > > how >> > > > > > > > > > > > frequently >> > > > > > > > > > > > > people are making use of MCP servers in the wild >> > before >> > > > > > > investing >> > > > > > > > > > > effort >> > > > > > > > > > > > in >> > > > > > > > > > > > > building and maintaining one for airflow. I'm sure >> > the >> > > > data >> > > > > > is >> > > > > > > > > > > available >> > > > > > > > > > > > > out there, just needs finding. >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Aritra Basu >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 28 May 2025, 11:18 pm Julian LaNeve, >> > > > > > > > > > > > <jul...@astronomer.io.invalid >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think this would be interesting now that the >> > > > Streamable >> > > > > > > HTTP >> > > > > > > > > > spec < >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> https://modelcontextprotocol.io/specification/2025-03-26/basic/transports >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > is out. I think in theory we could publish this >> > first >> > > > as >> > > > > an >> > > > > > > > > Airflow >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > provider that installs a plugin to expose an MCP >> > > > > endpoint, >> > > > > > > as a >> > > > > > > > > > PoC - >> > > > > > > > > > > > > this >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > becomes a much nicer experience than a local >> stdio >> > > one. >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Julian LaNeve >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > CTO >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Email: jul...@astronomer.io >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <mailto:jul...@astronomer.io>Mobile: 330 509 >> 5792 >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On May 28, 2025, at 1:25 PM, Shahar Epstein < >> > > > > > > > sha...@apache.org >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear community, >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Following the thread on Slack [1], initiated >> by >> > > Jason >> > > > > > > > Sebastian >> > > > > > > > > > > > Kusuma, >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > like to start an effort to officially support >> MCP >> > > in >> > > > > > > > Airflow's >> > > > > > > > > > > > > codebase. >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *Some background * >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Model Context Protocol (MCP) is an open >> standard, >> > > > > > > open-source >> > > > > > > > > > > > framework >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that standardizes the way AI models like LLM >> > > > integrate >> > > > > > and >> > > > > > > > > share >> > > > > > > > > > > data >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > with >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > external tools, systems and data sources. >> Think >> > of >> > > it >> > > > > as >> > > > > > a >> > > > > > > > > "USB-C >> > > > > > > > > > > for >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > AI" - >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a universal connector that simplifies and >> > > > standardizes >> > > > > AI >> > > > > > > > > > > > > integrations. A >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > notable example of an MCP server is GitHub's >> > > official >> > > > > > > > > > > implementation >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > [3], which >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > allows LLMs such as Claude, Copilot, and >> OpenAI >> > > (or: >> > > > > "MCP >> > > > > > > > > > clients") >> > > > > > > > > > > > to >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fetch pull request details, analyze code >> changes, >> > > and >> > > > > > > > generate >> > > > > > > > > > > review >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > summaries. >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *How could an MCP server be useful in >> Airflow?* >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Imagine the possibilities when LLMs can >> > seamlessly >> > > > > > interact >> > > > > > > > > with >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Airflow’s >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > API: triggering DAGs using natural language, >> > > > retrieving >> > > > > > DAG >> > > > > > > > run >> > > > > > > > > > > > > history, >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > enabling smart debugging, and more. This kind >> of >> > > > > > > integration >> > > > > > > > > > opens >> > > > > > > > > > > > the >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > door >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to a more intuitive, conversational interface >> for >> > > > > > workflow >> > > > > > > > > > > > > orchestration. >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *Why do we need to support it officially?* >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quid pro quo - LLMs become an integral part of >> > the >> > > > > modern >> > > > > > > > > > > development >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > experience, while Airflow evolves into the >> go-to >> > > for >> > > > > > > > > > orchestrating >> > > > > > > > > > > AI >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > workflows. By officially supporting it, we’ll >> > > enable >> > > > > > > multiple >> > > > > > > > > > users >> > > > > > > > > > > > to >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > interact with Airflow through their LLMs, >> > > > streamlining >> > > > > > > > > automation >> > > > > > > > > > > and >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > improving accessibility across diverse >> workflows. >> > > All >> > > > > of >> > > > > > > that >> > > > > > > > > is >> > > > > > > > > > > > viable >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with relatively small development effort (see >> > next >> > > > > > > > paragraph). >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *How should it be implemented?* >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As of today, there have been several >> > > implementations >> > > > of >> > > > > > MCP >> > > > > > > > > > servers >> > > > > > > > > > > > for >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Airflow API, the most visible one [4] made by >> > > > Abhishek >> > > > > > > Bhakat >> > > > > > > > > > from >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Astronomer. >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The efforts of implementing it and >> maintaining it >> > > in >> > > > > our >> > > > > > > > > codebase >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > shouldn't >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be too cumbersome (at least in theory), as we >> > could >> > > > > > utilize >> > > > > > > > > > > packages >> > > > > > > > > > > > > like >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fastmcp to auto-generate the server using the >> > > > existing >> > > > > > > > OpenAPI >> > > > > > > > > > > specs. >> > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be very happy if Abhishek could share his >> > > experience >> > > > in >> > > > > > > this >> > > > > > > > > > > thread. >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *Where else could we utilize MCP?* >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Beyond the scope of the public API, I could >> also >> > > > > imagine >> > > > > > > > using >> > > > > > > > > it >> > > > > > > > > > > to >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > communicate with Breeze. >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *How do we proceed from here?* >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Feel free to share your thoughts here in this >> > > > > discussion. >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If there are no objections, I'll be happy to >> > start >> > > > > > working >> > > > > > > on >> > > > > > > > > an >> > > > > > > > > > > AIP. >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sincerely, >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shahar Epstein >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *References:* >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] Slack discussion, >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> https://apache-airflow.slack.com/archives/C06K9Q5G2UA/p1746121916951569 >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [2] Introducing the model context protocol, >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > https://www.anthropic.com/news/model-context-protocol >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [3] GitHub Official MCP server, >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/github/github-mcp-server >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [4] Unofficial MCP Server made by Abhishek >> Hakat, >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > https://github.com/abhishekbhakat/airflow-mcp-server >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> >
