feat: diagnostics tool implementation #34
Conversation
| error({ | ||
| code = -32001, | ||
| message = "File not open in buffer", | ||
| data = "File must be open in Neovim to retrieve diagnostics: " .. filepath, | ||
| }) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Note to myself: Refactor the error returning in this file, as in the rest of the codebase, we return errors as values.
| local uri = params.uri | ||
| local filepath = uri | ||
| if uri:sub(1, 7) == "file://" then | ||
| filepath = uri:sub(8) -- Remove "file://" prefix | ||
| end |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we use vim.uri_to_fname here instead?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Done.
Since uri_to_fname throws if the input doesn't have a scheme I went back and forth on how defensive to be, but ended up going with the simplest/least defensive approach of just blindly passing whatever uri is into it assuming it will always be a proper file URI.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's fine, simple is good for now.
If we're trying to be defensive here, we might also wrap it in a pcall and check if it's ok.
| local log_module_ok, log = pcall(require, "claudecode.logger") | ||
| if not log_module_ok then | ||
| return { | ||
| code = -32603, -- Internal error | ||
| message = "Internal error", | ||
| data = "Failed to load logger module", | ||
| } | ||
| end |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think that we have to pcall this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I confess to copy/pasta on this from close_tab, fyi 🙈
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In that case, I'll have to take a look and do some refactoring. Thanks for the mention 👍
We're also passing nil explicitly to get diagnostics from all buffers
krmcbride
force-pushed
the
diag-tool
branch
2 times, most recently
from
27989b6 to
069e061
Compare
|
Something interesting happened as I was testing this just now -- Claude started adding 1 to line and character numbers on its own, so everything it mentioned was off by one (since I'm already compensating for this). So I asked it what the hell it was doing (because I could see the MCP diag tool response body was accurate) and it said that since it was Neovim LSP diagnostics, and those are 0-indexed, it was adding 1 to everything for me... So... I've removed any mention of neovim LSP from the things Claude can see in the diagnostic tool 😆 We're living in a weird new world |
|
You'll need to update the tests, as they are still expecting the old string values containing Neovim references. |
Oops! OK, should be g2g |
I've been tinkering around with fully implementing the
getDiagnosticstool and have things basically working in a similar fashion to how they do in VSCode.One little improvement I've made over the VSCode behavior is, when you ask about diagnostics in a file that doesn't have a buffer open, rather than lying to you and telling you the file is clean, it'll return a MCP error to indicate it can't return diagnostics for files without a buffer.
Summary
Add getDiagnostics tool for retrieving LSP diagnostics from Neovim
Details
buffers
numbers)