Open
Conversation
✅ Deploy Preview for w3cwebagentscg ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
Author
|
Linked GH account to W3c to resolve ipr issue. |
egekorkan
requested changes
Mar 9, 2026
TaskForces/Interoperability/Reports/report-interoperability.html
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
TaskForces/Interoperability/Reports/report-interoperability.html
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
TaskForces/Interoperability/Reports/report-interoperability.html
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
|
||
| <p>From an agent-environment interaction standpoint, OpenAPI describes the interface of a Web service but not its affordance semantics. An OpenAPI operation is a typed request-response pair; the specification provides no native concept of observable state, event subscription, or action lifecycle. Semantic annotations are possible through extension fields but are not standardized. This representational scope limits the degree to which agents can reason about OpenAPI-described tools without relying on natural language interpretation of documentation fields. Discovery is also not address natively: unlike WoT Thing Descriptions, which carry hypermedia links enabling navigation from a single entry point, OpenAPI specifications describe a fixed set of endpoints and provide no mechanism for runtime affordance discovery or environment traversal.</p> | ||
|
|
||
| <p>Practical evidence illustrates both the utility and the limitations of OpenAPI as a tool description baseline. Automated conversion of OpenAPI specifications to MCP tool definitions has been reported to succeed without manual intervention in the majority of cases, while a significant proportion require correcting specification errors before reliable invocation is possible. Separately, bidirectional conversion between OpenAPI specifications and WoT Thing Descriptions has been demonstrated, showing that the two formats are partially compatible but that richer affordance concepts such as event subscriptions and action lifecycle are not representable in OpenAPI without extensions.</p> |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would be interested in references to bidirectional conversion. There is TD -> OpenAPI at https://github.com/eclipse-thingweb/td-tools/tree/main/node/open-api-converter
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It would be good in general to link to "evidences"
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Absolutely. I propose committing this now + opening a related issue (you can assign it to me) or adding an issue block here. This will give me some time to organize more/better references. What do you think?
Collaborator
|
|
||
| <p>Practical evidence illustrates both the utility and the limitations of OpenAPI as a tool description baseline. Automated conversion of OpenAPI specifications to MCP tool definitions has been reported to succeed without manual intervention in the majority of cases, while a significant proportion require correcting specification errors before reliable invocation is possible. Separately, bidirectional conversion between OpenAPI specifications and WoT Thing Descriptions has been demonstrated, showing that the two formats are partially compatible but that richer affordance concepts such as event subscriptions and action lifecycle are not representable in OpenAPI without extensions.</p> | ||
|
|
||
| <aside class="issue" title="OpenAPI-to-WoT convergence and information loss in conversion"> |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this fits better to profiles section. @danaivach
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same comment on adding an issue block here.
Co-authored-by: Ege Korkan <egekorkan@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Ege Korkan <egekorkan@gmail.com>
This was referenced Mar 9, 2026
Collaborator
|
@andreiciortea I would wait maybe a week max to get more reviews but fine to merge to get going |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Initial commit for Section 9 of the report, as presented in the weekly meeting (2026-03-09).