Standardize rule distribution through an MCP server

[thomas-bartlett]

CodeGuard rules currently reach users through several channels: release ZIPs, per-tool translator outputs, and a GitHub Action. This discussion is to decide whether an MCP server should become the primary delivery mechanism, and whether the existing channels should be consolidated.

Our current understanding is that this would be a local MCP server that users run themselves, with the IDE connecting to it. We would like to confirm that direction here.

Questions for input

• Is a locally run MCP server the right model, or is there a case for a hosted one?
• How does a local server stay in sync with upstream releases and respect version pinning?
• Should we consolidate the number of distribution channels (ZIPs, translator bundles, GitHub Action, a possible uvx/pip CLI, MCP), and if so which ones survive?
• What is the minimum viable scope for a first version?

[thomas-bartlett]

MCP server was created #56

[thomas-bartlett]

Closing as resolved. The MCP server work shipped in #56. MCP-specific documentation is tracked in #63, and install-route evaluation including MCP is tracked in #61.