Skip to content

docs: Changed MCP image #1614

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jun 4, 2025
Merged

docs: Changed MCP image #1614

merged 5 commits into from
Jun 4, 2025

Conversation

vystrcild
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@vystrcild vystrcild requested a review from TC-MO as a code owner June 3, 2025 06:56
@vystrcild vystrcild requested review from jirispilka and removed request for TC-MO June 3, 2025 06:56
@vystrcild vystrcild changed the title Changed MCP image docs: Changed MCP image Jun 3, 2025
@vystrcild vystrcild requested a review from TC-MO June 3, 2025 06:58
@apify-service-account
Copy link

Preview for this PR was built for commit 2bd4c24 and is ready at https://pr-1614.preview.docs.apify.com!

@TC-MO
Copy link
Contributor

TC-MO commented Jun 3, 2025

All good from my side, just an unrelated ask, the link to mcp.apify.com at line 22 is triggering our link checker and failing, do we have to have it there? (especially since it seems that it redirects to documentation?)

- Fixed link for HTTPS endpoint
@vystrcild
Copy link
Contributor Author

@TC-MO Yeah, I put it inside ticks `` instead of link. Doesn't matter much.

@TC-MO
Copy link
Contributor

TC-MO commented Jun 3, 2025

Much obliged, that should fix the issue with link checker :)

@apify-service-account
Copy link

Preview for this PR was built for commit abd0a8c and is ready at https://pr-1614.preview.docs.apify.com!

Copy link
Contributor

@jirispilka jirispilka left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hi, thank you, the image is nice.

But we should not have there Apify Actors MCP Server. It should be Apify MCP Server or just MCP Sever (since it is already under the Apify "umbrella")

Also, MCP Hosts does not make much sense IMO.
I would use Host with MCP client.

@jirispilka jirispilka closed this Jun 3, 2025
@jirispilka jirispilka reopened this Jun 3, 2025
@apify-service-account
Copy link

Preview for this PR was built for commit abd0a8c and is ready at https://pr-1614.preview.docs.apify.com!

@apify-service-account
Copy link

Preview for this PR was built for commit 53233dd and is ready at https://pr-1614.preview.docs.apify.com!

@vystrcild
Copy link
Contributor Author

Changed picture:

  • I kept "Apify" in MCP Server because it's a standalone solution and based on feedback from Adam Frankl, we should put Apify everywhere we could
  • "Host with MCP client" is unnecessary complicated - just using "Clients" as everyone in the world in theirs schemas

Copy link
Contributor

@jirispilka jirispilka 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!

But please, can we rename the file? actors_mcp_new does not sound right imo.
Have you deleted the old one from the code base?

@apify-service-account
Copy link

Preview for this PR was built for commit 3e6e0faa and is ready at https://pr-1614.preview.docs.apify.com!

@jirispilka
Copy link
Contributor

@vystrcild the image is at a wrong location. It should be at/sources/platform/integrations/images/

@apify-service-account
Copy link

Preview for this PR was built for commit c04644bf and is ready at https://pr-1614.preview.docs.apify.com!

Copy link
Contributor

@jirispilka jirispilka left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good to me, thanks!

@vystrcild vystrcild merged commit 6deea51 into master Jun 4, 2025
9 checks passed
@vystrcild vystrcild deleted the fix/mcp_image branch June 4, 2025 13:37
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants