Containerising inspector

[aaronpowell]

Fixes #237

Motivation and Context

I want to be able to use a container version of the inspector rather than via npx.

How Has This Been Tested?

I merged the branch into main on my fork and created a tag so I could publish a release. Here's the workflow run (ignore the failing package job, I can't publish to npm) and here's the published image

Note: since the workflow is configured to publish to GitHub Packages not Docker Hub the GITHUB_TOKEN needs to be able to write packages. This is configured in the workflow, but you also need to update the repo settings to allow the workflow to request a token with write permissions:

Breaking Changes

Types of changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• Documentation update

Checklist

• I have read the MCP Documentation
• My code follows the repository's style guidelines
• New and existing tests pass locally
• I have added appropriate error handling
• I have added or updated documentation as needed

Additional context

Currently, the image only has the nodejs runtime in it, so it doesn't support running stdio servers with python/.NET/Java/etc. Instead, they would probably be handled as different tags. My primary focus is on supporthing servers that are SSE (and streamable http in the future)

[cliffhall]

We really need something in the "how has this been tested" section of these PRs, particularly if it hooks into CI.

[aaronpowell]

We really need something in the "how has this been tested" section of these PRs, particularly if it hooks into CI.

I'll update that section, but it's mainly running a docker build and starting a container.

Testing the CI pipeline is a bit harder, since it's artifact publishing, so I'm just using the instructions from the GitHub docs.

[cliffhall]

We really need something in the "how has this been tested" section of these PRs, particularly if it hooks into CI.

I'll update that section, but it's mainly running a docker build and starting a container.

Testing the CI pipeline is a bit harder, since it's artifact publishing, so I'm just using the instructions from the GitHub docs.

Got it. But I don't want to break the inspector with an untested workflow. Can you please test it in your fork and take screenshots of every step?

[aaronpowell]

@cliffhall I've updated the issue description with how I've tests it and links to the Actions run on my fork that I used.

Here's some screenshot of the image on my fork:

And the workflow run (sorry, it's pretty long, so I'll break it a bit 🤣):

[cliffhall]

@aaronpowell thanks for doing that testing, I really appreciate it. Will give it closer eyes soon.

[aaronpowell]

@aaronpowell thanks for doing that testing, I really appreciate it. Will give it closer eyes soon.

Let me know if you need any more details on the workflow or the life cycle.