Background

One of the motivators for upstreaming the connector was the spotify maintainer RFC https://github.com/backstage/backstage/issues/32062 aimed at aligning the community on how MCP Servers were modeled into the catalog

The discussion details in many ways mirrored / paralleled the discussion RHDH AI had internally around modeling AI Models and AI Model Servers into the catalog.

As such, although not exact matches per se, there is notable conceptual overlap between modeling MCP servers (and by extension, MCP registries and MCP tools) and AI models, model servers, and model registries.

Recent SIG calls have some early feedback that were captured in the owning epic https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHIDP-11685 

Task particulars

First, create a google doc for internal review of the RFC description content.

Then, Open an analogous RFC for modeling AI models and model servers in the catalog, where we

• cite the MCP server as reference, and as much as possible map the choices made for MCP to how we map AI models
  • NOTE:  option 3 from the MCP rfc appears to be the winner as of this writing
• From an optional perspective, vet with upstream and the spotify maintainers our connector's use of Components and Resources, in addition to the API usage in the MCP RFC.  Let's make sure we understand WHY those won't considered for MCP, and if that same lack of consideration applies to AI models and models servers.
  • Or who knows, maybe our discussion influences updates to what is done for MCP
• Additionally, given the lack of conformity wrt Model Registry APIs or Model Server APIs or Model APIs, as opposed to the single MCP Registry spec from Anthropic, introduce the notions of a normalization layer (ultimately expressed as the current connector's model/model server json schema) that can be consumed by an single ai model / model server entity provider.
  • The RFC should include references to various "registries" like what I articulated in https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p2SKY_26OlVy5-d-wa-eiNQ6Ns_haEhBut_w2VUSsrY/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.kttqafhfh6am , showing their REST APIs, common concepts, etc.
  • Would that JSON schema simple stop as a JSON schema with an openapi.json, or
  • Would that JSON schema say map into the catalog somehow
• After opening the RFC, next steps are captured in RHIDP-11755