refactor: extract reactive/imperative return type filtering to utility methods #66
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…y methods - Add filterNonReactiveReturnTypeMethod() and filterReactiveReturnTypeMethod() to McpProviderUtils for consistent return type validation - Add logging to warn when methods with incompatible return types are skipped - Replace inline return type checks across all provider classes with utility methods - Standardize import organization (group by external/internal packages) - Update tests to reflect filtering of non-reactive methods in async providers This refactoring improves code maintainability by centralizing the logic for determining whether a method has a reactive or non-reactive return type, and provides better visibility through logging when methods are filtered out. Affected providers: - Complete (Async/Sync, Stateless/Stateful) - Elicitation (Async/Sync) - Logging (Async/Sync) - Progress (Async/Sync) - Prompt (Async/Sync, Stateless/Stateful) - Resource (Async/Sync, Stateless/Stateful) - Sampling (Async/Sync) - Tool (Async/Sync, Stateless/Stateful) - Changed listeners (Prompt/Resource/Tool, Async/Sync) Signed-off-by: Christian Tzolov <[email protected]>
|
To back port to 0.5.1 |
tzolov
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 2, 2025
…y methods (#66) - Add filterNonReactiveReturnTypeMethod() and filterReactiveReturnTypeMethod() to McpProviderUtils for consistent return type validation - Add logging to warn when methods with incompatible return types are skipped - Replace inline return type checks across all provider classes with utility methods - Standardize import organization (group by external/internal packages) - Update tests to reflect filtering of non-reactive methods in async providers This refactoring improves code maintainability by centralizing the logic for determining whether a method has a reactive or non-reactive return type, and provides better visibility through logging when methods are filtered out. Affected providers: - Complete (Async/Sync, Stateless/Stateful) - Elicitation (Async/Sync) - Logging (Async/Sync) - Progress (Async/Sync) - Prompt (Async/Sync, Stateless/Stateful) - Resource (Async/Sync, Stateless/Stateful) - Sampling (Async/Sync) - Tool (Async/Sync, Stateless/Stateful) - Changed listeners (Prompt/Resource/Tool, Async/Sync) Signed-off-by: Christian Tzolov <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This refactoring improves code maintainability by centralizing the logic for determining whether a method has a reactive or non-reactive return type, and provides better visibility through logging when methods are filtered out.
Affected providers:
Related to spring-projects/spring-ai#4392