Simple MCP Server + Shiny Chat with MCP Support

[mconflitti-pbc]

Closes: #97

Setting up env vars for testing:
Run:

$> aws sso login
$> aws configure export-credentials
{
  "Version": 1,
  "AccessKeyId": "<access key>",
  "SecretAccessKey": "<secret key>",
  "SessionToken": "<session token>",
  "Expiration": "2025-07-02T02:37:29+00:00"
}

Then set the following env vars as follows:

CHATLAS_CHAT_PROVIDER: "bedrock-anthropic"
CHATLAS_CHAT_ARGS: '{"model": "us.anthropic.claude-sonnet-4-20250514-v1:0", "aws_region": "us-east-1", "aws_access_key": "<access key>", "aws_secret_key": "<secret key>", "aws_session_token": "<session token>"}'

MCP Server Landing Page (dm me for link)

Shiny Chat with MCP Support (dm me for link)

Before setup:

After setup:

[Lytol]

This is so great to see, and I think customers will be stoked to see the possibilities available with MCP implementations. A few things that I think need to be resolved before we could merge:

• The manifest.json for both extensions probably need a better version specifier, and just double-check the files and format for each.
• Decide what to do about the requirement of both an AWS integration and a Connect API key integration. I think there are ways to cut scope and reduce to a single integration per extension, and I also think it's fair to say "well, I'd rather wait until we can support multiple integrations". 🤷 One thing to keep in mind is that, if you do the latter, these extensions will only be available to much later Connect versions.

Everything else is just a nit or observation: meaning, use any of it that's useful, and ignore any of it that isn't. ;-P

One last general observation: I see the very clear benefit here of having a general chat app that utilizes many/multiple MCP servers, but I also wonder if it would be better to bundle the server and client just for "time to value" for customers installing the extension. I see arguments on both side here, and I'm definitely not trying to nudge you one way or another. Just thinking aloud...

[mconflitti-pbc]

Putting this on hold until Chatlas gets an update planned for EOW: posit-dev/chatlas#107
This will pull in MCP support which will simplify these examples.

[jonkeane]

Very cool stuff! We're still blocked behind posit-dev/chatlas#107 yeah?

[mconflitti-pbc]

Very cool stuff! We're still blocked behind posit-dev/chatlas#107 yeah?

Once his PR is in review I think it will be stable enough to start using. I will point to his branch until it merges and a new version is released.

[cpsievert]

I plan on merging a bit later today

[dotNomad]

Deployed both, and got them working. I did have a bit of a usability issue with removing then re-adding an MCP server without a hard reload. I'll leave it up to you whether that should be a blocker for this PR.

Looks like some adjustments to the images in the READMEs would be a good change as well to avoid the dogfood server URL in the READMEs.

Those are the only bits I hit, the adding of the MCP server was really straight forward and worked great in the chat.

---

One last thought: perhaps it would be good for the two extensions here to mention each other in their descriptions? I guess it isn't required for either to use the other, but if I was experimenting with Gallery examples I'd want to know both exist to try them together.

[nealrichardson]

Just a few comments on the readmes, I didn't look at the code. I'm assuming these apps work, and we should merge soon and iterate on that (with smaller diffs).

Addressed concerns