docs: update moved repository links

[ebbsanchez]

Summary

• update README badges and header asset to use the canonical openclaw/mcporter repository path
• update docs and generated JSON Schema metadata to use canonical repository links
• replace the missing/unsafe starter-config link with a verified mcporter config add command

Exact candidate

• head: 9a03247867edee6e652065c1465611eb282fc6f5
• base: c6940ef8e5e74ce9b97dd1e39d78aa15c95a4f24
• contributor credit preserved with a Co-authored-by trailer for @ebbsanchez

Verification

• git diff --check origin/main...HEAD — passed
• pnpm check — passed
• pnpm test — 129 files passed, 1 skipped; 833 tests passed, 3 skipped
• pnpm build — passed
• pnpm docs:site — passed
• npx mcporter config add context7 https://mcp.context7.com/mcp --dry-run — passed; the documented no-install setup command emitted the expected config without writing
• pnpm generate:schema followed by formatting — deterministic
• pnpm mcporter config --config /tmp/mcporter-pr225-nonexistent.json add context7 https://mcp.context7.com/mcp --dry-run — emitted the expected config without writing
• pnpm mcporter list https://mcp.context7.com/mcp --status --exit-code — healthy; 2 tools
• direct Context7 tool call — passed
• Node/Rolldown-generated Context7 CLI invocation — passed
• Context7 typed-client generation — passed
• canonical GitHub, raw asset, schema, releases, and badge URLs — HTTP 200 without redirects
• pnpm pack --dry-run --json — passed
• pnpm audit --audit-level high --json — 0 vulnerabilities
• pnpm outdated --format json — no outdated direct dependencies
• autoreview — clean; no accepted/actionable findings; correctness confidence 0.98
• review-fix autoreview — clean; no accepted/actionable findings; correctness confidence 0.96

Public Model Identifier Gate

PASS. The exact candidate diff introduces no model identifiers. Pre-existing packaged OpenAI labels are publicly documented at:

• https://developers.openai.com/api/docs/models/gpt-5.1
• https://developers.openai.com/api/docs/models/gpt-5-pro

Remaining matches are generic product families or local session labels, not provider model identifiers.

[clawsweeper]

Codex review: needs real behavior proof before merge. Reviewed July 6, 2026, 12:02 PM ET / 16:02 UTC.

Summary
The PR updates README and docs links from old steipete/mcporter repository paths to openclaw/mcporter paths.

Reproducibility: yes. Source inspection at PR head shows the quickstart points to config/mcporter.json, and that file contains local-only entries unsuitable for a first-time reusable config.

Review metrics: none identified.

Merge readiness
Overall: 🦪 silver shellfish
Proof: 🦪 silver shellfish
Patch quality: 🦪 silver shellfish
Result: blocked until stronger real behavior proof is added.

Overall follows the weaker of proof and patch quality, so missing proof can cap an otherwise strong patch.

Rank-up moves:

• [P1] Replace the quickstart link with a sanitized example config or add a reusable example file.
• [P1] Add redacted terminal output or copied live output showing the updated links resolve.

Proof guidance:

• [P1] Needs stronger real behavior proof before merge: The PR body says the changed links returned HTTP 200, but it does not include terminal output, copied live output, or logs showing that check; please add redacted observable proof, and updating the PR body should trigger a fresh ClawSweeper review. After adding proof, update the PR body; ClawSweeper should re-review automatically. If it does not, the PR author or someone with repository write access can comment @clawsweeper re-review.

Risk before merge

• [P1] Merging as-is would tell first-time users to seed their home config with repository-specific MCP servers that can fail on their machines.
• [P1] The PR body states that changed links returned HTTP 200, but it does not include terminal output, logs, or another observable proof artifact.

Maintainer options:

1. Decide the mitigation before merge
   Keep the repository-link updates, but replace the quickstart target with a sanitized sample config or a docs-owned inline example before merge.
2. Pause or close
   Do not merge this PR until maintainers decide whether the risk is worth taking.

Next step before merge

• [P1] No repair lane is recommended while contributor proof is insufficient; the contributor can address the quickstart target and add observable link-check proof in the PR.

Security
Cleared: No security or supply-chain regression was found; the blocker is documentation correctness, not secret handling or code execution changes.

Review findings

• [P2] Point quickstart at a sanitized example config — docs/quickstart.md:7

Review details

Best possible solution:

Keep the repository-link updates, but replace the quickstart target with a sanitized sample config or a docs-owned inline example before merge.

Do we have a high-confidence way to reproduce the issue?

Yes. Source inspection at PR head shows the quickstart points to config/mcporter.json, and that file contains local-only entries unsuitable for a first-time reusable config.

Is this the best way to solve the issue?

No. Updating moved repository links is the right direction, but the quickstart should not solve a missing example link by pointing users at the live project config.

Full review comments:

• [P2] Point quickstart at a sanitized example config — docs/quickstart.md:7
  This changed link now tells users without an MCP server to copy the repo's live config/mcporter.json, but that file contains project-local entries such as NODE_OPTIONS=--require=./scripts/mcp_signoz_retry_patch.cjs and an iterm command under /Users/steipete/Projects/iterm-mcp. A first-time user following the quickstart would import broken local-only servers, so this should link to or add a sanitized starter config instead.
  Confidence: 0.92

Overall correctness: patch is incorrect
Overall confidence: 0.9

AGENTS.md: found, but no applicable review policy affected this item.

Codex review notes: model internal, reasoning high; reviewed against f95142b66511.

Label changes

Label changes:

• add rating: 🦪 silver shellfish: Overall readiness is 🦪 silver shellfish; proof is 🦪 silver shellfish and patch quality is 🦪 silver shellfish.
• add status: 📣 needs proof: The PR needs real behavior proof before ClawSweeper can clear the contributor ask. Needs stronger real behavior proof before merge: The PR body says the changed links returned HTTP 200, but it does not include terminal output, copied live output, or logs showing that check; please add redacted observable proof, and updating the PR body should trigger a fresh ClawSweeper review. After adding proof, update the PR body; ClawSweeper should re-review automatically. If it does not, the PR author or someone with repository write access can comment @clawsweeper re-review.
• remove rating: 🐚 platinum hermit: Current PR rating is rating: 🦪 silver shellfish, so this older rating label is no longer current.
• remove status: 👀 ready for maintainer look: Current PR status label is status: 📣 needs proof.

Label justifications:

• P3: This is a low-risk documentation cleanup PR with a bounded quickstart correctness blocker.
• rating: 🦪 silver shellfish: Overall readiness is 🦪 silver shellfish; proof is 🦪 silver shellfish and patch quality is 🦪 silver shellfish.
• status: 📣 needs proof: The PR needs real behavior proof before ClawSweeper can clear the contributor ask. Needs stronger real behavior proof before merge: The PR body says the changed links returned HTTP 200, but it does not include terminal output, copied live output, or logs showing that check; please add redacted observable proof, and updating the PR body should trigger a fresh ClawSweeper review. After adding proof, update the PR body; ClawSweeper should re-review automatically. If it does not, the PR author or someone with repository write access can comment @clawsweeper re-review.

Evidence reviewed

What I checked:

• Quickstart target changed to project config: At PR head, the quickstart tells users without an MCP server to copy config/mcporter.json from the repository into ~/.mcporter/mcporter.json. (docs/quickstart.md:7, c9bc78e0cf64)
• Linked config is not a reusable starter file: The referenced config includes project-local behavior such as NODE_OPTIONS requiring ./scripts/mcp_signoz_retry_patch.cjs and an iterm server using /Users/steipete/Projects/iterm-mcp. (config/mcporter.json:83, c9bc78e0cf64)
• No example config exists on current main: The config directory currently contains only config/mcporter.json, so the old example link is missing but the replacement should not be the project-specific config. (f95142b66511)
• Whitespace check passed: The submitted diff has no git diff --check whitespace errors, so the blocker is docs correctness rather than formatting. (c9bc78e0cf64)

Likely related people:

• Peter Steinberger: Blame and file history show the README and docs baseline touched by this PR were introduced in the v0.12.3 release-prep commit, with the next release-start commit also on current main. (role: recent docs and release-area contributor; confidence: high; commits: f20febe322b6, f95142b66511; files: README.md, docs/quickstart.md, docs/config.md)

What the crustacean ranks mean

• 🦀 challenger crab: rare, exceptional readiness with strong proof, clean implementation, and convincing validation.
• 🦞 diamond lobster: very strong readiness with only minor maintainer review expected.
• 🐚 platinum hermit: good normal PR, likely mergeable with ordinary maintainer review.
• 🦐 gold shrimp: useful signal, but proof or patch confidence is still limited.
• 🦪 silver shellfish: thin signal; proof, validation, or implementation needs work.
• 🧂 unranked krab: not merge-ready because proof is missing/unusable or there are serious correctness or safety concerns.
• 🌊 off-meta tidepool: rating does not apply to this item.

Shiny media proof means a screenshot, video, or linked artifact directly shows the changed behavior. Runtime, network, CSP, and security claims still need visible diagnostics.

How this review workflow works

• ClawSweeper keeps one durable marker-backed review comment per issue or PR.
• Re-runs edit this comment so the latest verdict, findings, and automation markers stay together instead of adding duplicate bot comments.
• A fresh review can be triggered by eligible @clawsweeper re-review comments, exact-item GitHub events, scheduled/background review runs, or manual workflow dispatch.
• PR/issue authors and users with repository write access can comment @clawsweeper re-review or @clawsweeper re-run on an open PR or issue to request a fresh review only.
• Maintainers can also comment @clawsweeper review to request a fresh review only.
• Fresh-review commands do not start repair, autofix, rebase, CI repair, or automerge.
• Maintainer-only repair and merge flows require explicit commands such as @clawsweeper autofix, @clawsweeper automerge, @clawsweeper fix ci, or @clawsweeper address review.
• Maintainers can comment @clawsweeper explain to ask for more context, or @clawsweeper stop to stop active automation.

Review history (1 earlier review cycle)

• reviewed 2026-07-03T15:58:56.742Z sha c9bc78e :: needs real behavior proof before merge. :: none

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: c9bc78e0cf

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

[steipete]

@clawsweeper re-review

[clawsweeper]

🦞🧹
ClawSweeper re-review requested.

I asked ClawSweeper to review this item again.
Action: item re-review queued (workflow sweep.yml, event repository_dispatch).
Result: the existing ClawSweeper review comment will be edited in place when the review finishes.

Re-review progress:

• State: Complete
• Detail: The item is closed, terminal review leases were released, and no stale verdict was published or routed.
• Run: https://github.com/openclaw/clawsweeper/actions/runs/29201654970
• Updated: 2026-07-12T17:15:39.230Z

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: b8ee6a2da3

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[steipete]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. You're on a roll.

Reviewed commit: b8ee6a2da3

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 655b1ca9c3

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[steipete]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. 🎉

Reviewed commit: 9a03247867

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[steipete]

Exact-head proof for 9a03247867edee6e652065c1465611eb282fc6f5:

• git diff --check origin/main...HEAD — passed
• pnpm check — passed
• pnpm docs:site — passed
• npx mcporter config add context7 https://mcp.context7.com/mcp --dry-run — passed; expected config emitted, no write
• pnpm test — 129 files passed, 1 skipped; 833 tests passed, 3 skipped
• CI run https://github.com/openclaw/mcporter/actions/runs/29197235444 — Ubuntu, macOS, and Windows all passed on this exact head
• Socket Security project report and pull-request alerts — passed on this exact head
• exact-head hosted Codex review — no major issues
• all review threads — resolved

Public Model Identifier Gate: PASS. The exact diff adds no model identifiers. The pre-existing packaged OpenAI identifiers are documented by the official sources:

• https://developers.openai.com/api/docs/models/gpt-5.1
• https://developers.openai.com/api/docs/models/gpt-5-pro

Contributor credit for @ebbsanchez remains preserved in the commit trailers.

[steipete]

Post-merge verification:

• merged commit: 710840fb7dd0d1f7400d543409b660acd77b149e
• merged tree matches exact proven head 9a03247867edee6e652065c1465611eb282fc6f5
• main fetched and synchronized at the merge commit
• pnpm docs:site — passed on merged main
• documented npx mcporter config add ... --dry-run command — passed without writing
• live Context7 status check — healthy, 2 tools
• canonical repository, workflow, docs, badge, raw image, and raw schema URLs — HTTP 200
• related PR/issue searches found no duplicate item requiring closeout

Thanks @ebbsanchez! GitHub records the squash commit with lin as author, and the co-author trailer is retained.