Skip to content

refactor(1/12): remove deprecated logging tools#319

Open
cameroncooke wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
refactor/remove-logging-tools
Open

refactor(1/12): remove deprecated logging tools#319
cameroncooke wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
refactor/remove-logging-tools

Conversation

@cameroncooke
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Summary

This is PR 1 of 12 in a stacked PR series that decouples the rendering pipeline from MCP transport. This PR can be reviewed and merged independently.

Removes all deprecated logging tools that were superseded by the unified log capture approach. These tools (start_sim_log_cap, stop_sim_log_cap, start_device_log_cap, stop_device_log_cap, launch_app_logs_sim) used a start/stop session model that was fragile and leaked resources. The replacement (already shipped in earlier releases) integrates log capture directly into build-and-run workflows, making these standalone logging tools dead code.

What changes

  • Delete all 4 logging tool implementations and their tests (src/mcp/tools/logging/)
  • Delete launch_app_logs_sim tool (simulator variant that combined launch + log capture)
  • Remove corresponding YAML manifests and the logging workflow manifest
  • Remove logging tool references from device and simulator workflow manifests
  • Delete the e2e smoke test for logging tools

Why

These tools have been deprecated since the log capture was integrated into build-run workflows. Removing them before the rendering pipeline refactor avoids migrating dead code to the new handler contract, keeping subsequent PRs in this stack cleaner.

Stack navigation

  • PR 1/12 (this PR): Remove deprecated logging tools
  • PR 2/12: Pipeline event types, parsers, and event builders
  • PR 3/12: Rendering engine and output formatting
  • PR 4/12: Build/test utility extraction, platform steps, xcodebuild pipeline
  • PR 5/12: Runtime handler contract and tool invoker
  • PR 6/12: Tool migrations - Simulator tools
  • PR 7/12: Tool migrations - Device + macOS tools
  • PR 8/12: Tool migrations - UI automation tools
  • PR 9/12: Tool migrations - Remaining tools
  • PR 10/12: CLI, daemon, and MCP server boundaries
  • PR 11/12: Manifests, config, docs, and examples
  • PR 12/12: Snapshot test fixtures and benchmarks

Test plan

  • npx vitest run passes (no tests reference removed tools)
  • No remaining imports of deleted modules in the codebase
  • Manifest validation passes without the removed YAML files

@cameroncooke cameroncooke force-pushed the refactor/remove-logging-tools branch from 585faf0 to 9a660e0 Compare April 8, 2026 21:29
Comment on lines 23 to 27
- get_app_bundle_id
- screenshot
- snapshot_ui
- stop_sim_log_cap
- start_sim_log_cap
- get_coverage_report
- get_file_coverage
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Bug: The test it('includes logging tools', ...) will fail because it asserts the presence of start_sim_log_cap and stop_sim_log_cap, which have been removed from the simulator workflow.
Severity: HIGH

Suggested Fix

Update the test it('includes logging tools', ...) in src/smoke-tests/__tests__/e2e-mcp-discovery.test.ts to remove the assertions for start_sim_log_cap and stop_sim_log_cap, aligning the test with the updated workflow.

Prompt for AI Agent
Review the code at the location below. A potential bug has been identified by an AI
agent.
Verify if this is a real issue. If it is, propose a fix; if not, explain why it's not
valid.

Location: manifests/workflows/simulator.yaml#L23-L27

Potential issue: The changes in `manifests/workflows/simulator.yaml` remove the
`start_sim_log_cap` and `stop_sim_log_cap` steps from the `simulator` workflow. However,
a corresponding change was not made in the test file
`src/smoke-tests/__tests__/e2e-mcp-discovery.test.ts`. This test file contains a test
case, `it('includes logging tools', ...)`, which explicitly asserts the presence of
these removed logging tools. Consequently, this test will fail during execution,
blocking the CI/CD pipeline.

Did we get this right? 👍 / 👎 to inform future reviews.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant