Update README for v1.5.0 highlights

[kargnas]

Summary

• refresh the English README version section to call out the new v1.5.0 features with checkmark highlights
• remove the outdated v1.4.0 release notes from the latest changes section

Testing

• not run (documentation-only change)

---

https://chatgpt.com/codex/tasks/task_e_68eb513211608321951c68943fe09129

[claude]

Pull Request Review: Update README for v1.5.0 highlights

Summary

This PR updates the README to highlight v1.5.0 features and removes outdated v1.4.0 content. The changes are documentation-only and improve the clarity of version information for users.

---

Code Quality & Best Practices

Strengths:

• Clear structure: The new v1.5.0 section uses checkmark bullets which makes features immediately scannable
• Concise descriptions: Each feature bullet is well-written and explains both the what and why
• Consistent formatting: Maintains the established pattern from previous version sections
• Technical accuracy: Feature descriptions align with actual v1.5.0 capabilities

Observations:

• The removal of 34 lines of v1.4.0 content while adding only 6 lines keeps the README focused on recent changes
• Good use of technical terminology (ToolResponse::structured(), FormatsTabularToolResponses, MCP_TOOLS_PAGE_SIZE)

---

Potential Issues & Suggestions

1. Version History Context (Minor)
The v1.4.0 section is completely removed, which might be intentional but could leave users without a clear migration path. Consider adding a brief note or link to release notes/changelog for users who need v1.4.0 information.

2. Technical Detail Depth (Minor)
The v1.5.0 bullets are quite dense with technical details. While accurate, this might be overwhelming for new users. Consider a two-tier approach with high-level summary followed by technical details.

3. Consistency Check
Ensure the detailed examples later in the README (lines 962-996 for tabular responses, etc.) still match these high-level descriptions.

4. Breaking Changes
Confirm v1.5.0 has no breaking changes that should be documented in the Breaking Changes section.

---

Security Concerns

None identified - This is a documentation-only change with no code modifications.

---

Test Coverage

Not applicable - Documentation changes don't require tests. The PR description correctly notes "not run (documentation-only change)".

---

Performance Considerations

None - Documentation changes have no performance impact.

---

Recommendations

Priority: Low - Approve as-is

1. The changes are clean, accurate, and improve documentation
2. Consider adding a brief reference to where users can find v1.4.0 information
3. Consider adding a What's New in v1.5.0 link if there's a dedicated announcement

Optional Enhancements:

• Add a table of contents link for quick navigation to version sections
• Consider a standardized format for version highlights
• Verify that detailed examples in the README demonstrate these v1.5.0 features

---

Final Verdict

LGTM (Looks Good To Me)

This is a well-executed documentation update that:

• Accurately describes v1.5.0 features
• Removes outdated content to reduce maintenance burden
• Maintains consistency with the repository's documentation standards
• Follows the guidance in CLAUDE.md

The changes are ready to merge. The minor suggestions above are optional improvements for consideration in future documentation updates.

---

Reviewed by: Claude Code

[claude]

Code Review - PR #84: Update README for v1.5.0 highlights

✅ Overall Assessment

This is a well-executed documentation update that successfully refreshes the README to highlight the new v1.5.0 features. The PR is clean, focused, and follows the repository's documentation standards.

---

✅ Strengths

1. Clear Content Organization

• The new v1.5.0 highlights section is well-structured with checkmark emoji indicators (✅) that match the section title
• Bullet points effectively summarize the four major feature areas: structured responses, tabular helpers, pagination, and prompts
• Technical terminology is used appropriately with clear explanations

2. Proper Documentation Maintenance

• Correctly removes outdated v1.4.0 release notes while preserving important v1.1.0 breaking changes
• Maintains backward compatibility information that users still need
• Follows the principle of keeping documentation current without losing critical migration info

3. Consistency with Repository Standards

• Aligns with CLAUDE.md guidance: "When you add new feature, add it to README.md"
• Documentation-only change appropriately marked as not requiring test runs
• Follows the existing README structure and formatting conventions

---

📝 Minor Observations & Suggestions

1. Date Accuracy
The section header shows "Oct 2025" but given the environment date is 2025-10-12, this appears to be intentionally future-dated or based on the actual release date. This is acceptable, though worth verifying it matches the actual release timeline.

2. Content Density
The v1.5.0 highlights use dense technical prose in a single paragraph per bullet point. Consider whether breaking some bullets into sub-bullets would improve scannability:

- **Structured tool responses**
  - Use `ToolResponse::structured()` to emit plain text and JSON payloads simultaneously
  - Server automatically publishes `structuredContent`
  - Tools can optionally expose `title()` and `outputSchema()` for schema-aware clients

However, the current format is still readable and may be preferred for brevity.

3. Link Opportunities
Consider adding links to relevant sections or documentation:

• Link to the tool interface documentation when mentioning ToolInterface
• Link to examples when mentioning "Example tools and Pest tests"
• Link to configuration documentation for MCP_TOOLS_PAGE_SIZE

---

✅ Quality Checklist

• ✅ Code Quality: N/A (documentation only)
• ✅ Best Practices: Follows documentation standards
• ✅ Potential Bugs: None identified
• ✅ Performance: N/A (documentation only)
• ✅ Security Concerns: None
• ✅ Test Coverage: Appropriately marked as not requiring tests

---

🎯 Recommendation

APPROVE - This PR successfully accomplishes its stated goal of refreshing the README for v1.5.0. The documentation is clear, accurate, and maintains good hygiene by removing outdated content while preserving necessary migration information.

The changes improve the documentation quality and will help users quickly understand the new v1.5.0 capabilities. No blocking issues identified.

---

Review completed by Claude Code following repository CLAUDE.md guidelines