issuefs: FUSE filesystem representing issues (e.g. JIRA) for the use with AI agents code-assistants
an invention by llansky3
Updated about 2 months ago. 3 hacker ♥️. 2 followers.

Description

Creating a FUSE filesystem (issuefs) that mounts issues from various ticketing systems (Github, Jira, Bugzilla, Redmine) as files to your local file system.

And why this is good idea?

  • User can use favorite command line tools to view and search the tickets from various sources
  • User can use AI agents capabilities from your favorite IDE or cli to ask question about the issues, project or functionality while providing relevant tickets as context without extra work.
  • User can use it during development of the new features when you let the AI agent to jump start the solution. The issuefs will give the AI agent the context (AI agents just read few more files) about the bug or requested features. No need for copying and pasting issues to user prompt or by using extra MCP tools to access the issues. These you can still do but this approach is on purpose different.

Goals

  1. Add Github issue support
  2. Proof the concept/approach by apply the approach on itself using Github issues for tracking and development of new features
  3. Add support for Bugzilla and Redmine using this approach in the process of doing it. Record a video of it.
  4. Clean-up and test the implementation and create some documentation
  5. Create a blog post about this approach

Resources

There is a prototype implementation here. This currently sort of works with JIRA only.

Looking for hackers with the skills:

fs jira bugzilla github issue ai llm code-assistant agent fuse

This project is part of:

Hack Week 25

Activity

  • about 2 months ago: alnovak liked this project.
  • about 2 months ago: llansky3 added keyword "jira" to this project.
  • about 2 months ago: llansky3 added keyword "bugzilla" to this project.
  • about 2 months ago: llansky3 added keyword "github" to this project.
  • about 2 months ago: llansky3 added keyword "issue" to this project.
  • about 2 months ago: llansky3 added keyword "ai" to this project.
  • about 2 months ago: llansky3 added keyword "llm" to this project.
  • about 2 months ago: llansky3 added keyword "code-assistant" to this project.
  • about 2 months ago: llansky3 added keyword "agent" to this project.
  • about 2 months ago: llansky3 added keyword "fuse" to this project.
  • about 2 months ago: llansky3 added keyword "fs" to this project.
  • 2 months ago: mnhauke liked this project.
  • 2 months ago: llansky3 started this project.
  • 2 months ago: epaolantonio liked this project.
  • 2 months ago: llansky3 originated this project.


    • Comments

    • llansky3
      about 2 months ago by llansky3 | Reply

      Quick update: 1,2 and partially 3 and 4 (no Redmine and no video yet) are basically done. I think best to illustrate what is working is to explain how this project was applied on itself on "adding BZ support" example:

      1. Open the issuefs source code repository in VSCode and setup .env with the right tokens

      2. Run 'make run' in separate bash there. This mounts issuefs to '.issuefs/mnt' sub-folder. No queries there yet just version.txt showing the connections to available clients.

      3. Create a query directory 'mkdir .issuefs/mnt/query_anything'

      4. Edit .issuefs/mnt/query_anything/config.yaml so is has enabled: true and in github section repo: llansky3/issuefs and q: is:issue state:open. This loads all the opened issues in this repository and they are available as GITHUB-1.txt, GITHUB-2.txt etc. files

      5. Then I wanted to implement #4 which is in GITHUB-4.txt so this is the prompt for the code assistant I used: There is reported feature request in .issuefs/mnt/query_anything/GITHUB-4.txt! Please read it first and if something is ambiguous or not clear then do NOT implement anything but rather ask for further clarifications. Once everything is clear then implement this feature.

      6. I checked to code quickly, results: good enough for this proof of concept. I just asked it to also Please update also _get_config_header and README.md so it contains bugzilla reference too. and after this commited to dev_1 branch

    • llansky3
      about 2 months ago by llansky3 | Reply

      In similar way this should now work for Jira and Bugzilla issues too (not only Github).

      But I can imagine this approach could then allow following automations in rather very simple way :

      1. Automation bot mounts all the opened issue for given repository via issuefs. These issues could be in different tracking systems.

      2. Bot loops through all the open issues and does:

        • Creates a new "fix/feature" branch for a given issue
        • Bot instructs code assistant (LLM) (ASK) to determine if the request is clear or there are other issues asking for something that would be in contradiction to the request or similar thing and could be implemented together. If there things that are not clear or ambiguous then bot would comment the issue asking for clarifications and stop.
        • Otherwise bot instructs code assistant (AGENT) to implement the requested feature
        • Then bot runs available tests (or there could be quality assurance AI agent) and if everything looks good then PR is creates

      3. Developer comes to his/her machine in the morning and reviews all the PRs. If something is not right, then clarification can be made to issues to specify better what is needed (or code improved directly in the PR). And the cycle (1), (2) and (3) repeats until good enough.

    • llansky3
      about 2 months ago by llansky3 | Reply

      But the above can be of coursed achieved via MCP too but then one needs to be sure that LLM makes the right queries to get all the context. With this approach:

      • There is additional layer of control - the AI agent has only access to filesystem as usual no need to give wide access to the external tools via MCP. This could be simple additional layer of security that would otherwise needs to be guaranteed by MCP tools or the toolchain.

      • It is fairly transparent what AI agent can see and easy to restrict visibility to only needed bits.

    • llansky3
      about 2 months ago by llansky3 | Reply

      Wrap up demo video here

    Similar Projects

    Review SCC team internal development processes by calmeidadeoliveira

    Description

    Continue with the Hackweek 2024, with focus on reviewing existing processes / ways of working and creating workflows:

    Goals

    • Check all the processes from [1] and [3]
    • move them to confluence [4], make comments, corrections, etc.
    • present the result to the SCC team and ask for reviews

    Resources

    [1] https://github.com/SUSE/scc-docs/blob/master/team/workflow/kanban-process.md [2] https://github.com/SUSE/scc-docs/tree/master/team [3] https://github.com/SUSE/scc-docs/tree/master/team/workflow

    Confluence

    [4] https://confluence.suse.com/spaces/scc/pages/1537703975/Processes+and+ways+of+working

    GenAI-Powered Systemic Bug Evaluation and Management Assistant by rtsvetkov

    Motivation

    What is the decision critical question which one can ask on a bug? How this question affects the decision on a bug and why?

    Let's make GenAI look on the bug from the systemic point and evaluate what we don't know. Which piece of information is missing to take a decision?

    Description

    To build a tool that takes a raw bug report (including error messages and context) and uses a large language model (LLM) to generate a series of structured, Socratic-style or Systemic questions designed to guide a the integration and development toward the root cause, rather than just providing a direct, potentially incorrect fix.

    Goals

    Set up a Python environment

    Set the environment and get a Gemini API key. 2. Collect 5-10 realistic bug reports (from open-source projects, personal projects, or public forums like Stack Overflow—include the error message and the initial context).

    Build the Dialogue Loop

    1. Write a basic Python script using the Gemini API.
    2. Implement a simple conversational loop: User Input (Bug) -> AI Output (Question) -> User Input (Answer to AI's question) -> AI Output (Next Question). Code Implementation

    Socratic/Systemic Strategy Implementation

    1. Refine the logic to ensure the questions follow a Socratic and Systemic path (e.g., from symptom-> context -> assumptions -> -> critical parts -> ).
    2. Implement Function Calling (an advanced feature of the Gemini API) to suggest specific actions to the user, like "Run a ping test" or "Check the database logs."
    3. Implement Bugzillla call to collect the
    4. Implement Questioning Framework as LLVM pre-conditioning
    5. Define set of instructions
    6. Assemble the Tool

    Resources

    What are Systemic Questions?

    Systemic questions explore the relationships, patterns, and interactions within a system rather than focusing on isolated elements.
    In IT, they help uncover hidden dependencies, feedback loops, assumptions, and side-effects during debugging or architecture analysis.

    Gitlab Project

    gitlab.suse.de/sle-prjmgr/BugDecisionCritical_Question

    Bugzilla goes AI - Phase 1 by nwalter

    Description

    This project, Bugzilla goes AI, aims to boost developer productivity by creating an autonomous AI bug agent during Hackweek. The primary goal is to reduce the time employees spend triaging bugs by integrating Ollama to summarize issues, recommend next steps, and push focused daily reports to a Web Interface.

    Goals

    To reduce employee time spent on Bugzilla by implementing an AI tool that triages and summarizes bug reports, providing actionable recommendations to the team via Web Interface.

    Project Charter

    Bugzilla goes AI Phase 1

    Description

    Project Achievements during Hackweek

    In this file you can read about what we achieved during Hackweek.

    Project Achievements

    The Agentic Rancher Experiment: Do Androids Dream of Electric Cattle? by moio

    Rancher is a beast of a codebase. Let's investigate if the new 2025 generation of GitHub Autonomous Coding Agents and Copilot Workspaces can actually tame it. A GitHub robot mascot trying to lasso a blue bull with a Kubernetes logo tatooed on it

    The Plan

    Create a sandbox GitHub Organization, clone in key Rancher repositories, and let the AI loose to see if it can handle real-world enterprise OSS maintenance - or if it just hallucinates new breeds of Kubernetes resources!

    Specifically, throw "Agentic Coders" some typical tasks in a complex, long-lived open-source project, such as:


    ❥ The Grunt Work: generate missing GoDocs, unit tests, and refactorings. Rebase PRs.

    ❥ The Complex Stuff: fix actual (historical) bugs and feature requests to see if they can traverse the complexity without (too much) human hand-holding.

    ❥ Hunting Down Gaps: find areas lacking in docs, areas of improvement in code, dependency bumps, and so on.


    If time allows, also experiment with Model Context Protocol (MCP) to give agents context on our specific build pipelines and CI/CD logs.

    Why?

    We know AI can write "Hello World." and also moderately complex programs from a green field. But can it rebase a 3-month-old PR with conflicts in rancher/rancher? I want to find the breaking point of current AI agents to determine if and how they can help us to reduce our technical debt, work faster and better. At the same time, find out about pitfalls and shortcomings.

    The CONCLUSION!!!

    A add-emoji State of the Union add-emoji document was compiled to summarize lessons learned this week. For more gory details, just read on the diary below! add-emoji

    Is SUSE Trending? Popularity and Developer Sentiment Insight Using Native AI Capabilities by terezacerna

    Description

    This project aims to explore the popularity and developer sentiment around SUSE and its technologies compared to Red Hat and their technologies. Using publicly available data sources, I will analyze search trends, developer preferences, repository activity, and media presence. The final outcome will be an interactive Power BI dashboard that provides insights into how SUSE is perceived and discussed across the web and among developers.

    Goals

    1. Assess the popularity of SUSE products and brand compared to Red Hat using Google Trends.
    2. Analyze developer satisfaction and usage trends from the Stack Overflow Developer Survey.
    3. Use the GitHub API to compare SUSE and Red Hat repositories in terms of stars, forks, contributors, and issue activity.
    4. Perform sentiment analysis on GitHub issue comments to measure community tone and engagement using built-in Copilot capabilities.
    5. Perform sentiment analysis on Reddit comments related to SUSE technologies using built-in Copilot capabilities.
    6. Use Gnews.io to track and compare the volume of news articles mentioning SUSE and Red Hat technologies.
    7. Test the integration of Copilot (AI) within Power BI for enhanced data analysis and visualization.
    8. Deliver a comprehensive Power BI report summarizing findings and insights.
    9. Test the full potential of Power BI, including its AI features and native language Q&A.

    Resources

    1. Google Trends: Web scraping for search popularity data
    2. Stack Overflow Developer Survey: For technology popularity and satisfaction comparison
    3. GitHub API: For repository data (stars, forks, contributors, issues, comments).
    4. Gnews.io API: For article volume and mentions analysis.
    5. Reddit: SUSE related topics with comments.

    AI-Powered Unit Test Automation for Agama by joseivanlopez

    The Agama project is a multi-language Linux installer that leverages the distinct strengths of several key technologies:

    • Rust: Used for the back-end services and the core HTTP API, providing performance and safety.
    • TypeScript (React/PatternFly): Powers the modern web user interface (UI), ensuring a consistent and responsive user experience.
    • Ruby: Integrates existing, robust YaST libraries (e.g., yast-storage-ng) to reuse established functionality.

    The Problem: Testing Overhead

    Developing and maintaining code across these three languages requires a significant, tedious effort in writing, reviewing, and updating unit tests for each component. This high cost of testing is a drain on developer resources and can slow down the project's evolution.

    The Solution: AI-Driven Automation

    This project aims to eliminate the manual overhead of unit testing by exploring and integrating AI-driven code generation tools. We will investigate how AI can:

    1. Automatically generate new unit tests as code is developed.
    2. Intelligently correct and update existing unit tests when the application code changes.

    By automating this crucial but monotonous task, we can free developers to focus on feature implementation and significantly improve the speed and maintainability of the Agama codebase.

    Goals

    • Proof of Concept: Successfully integrate and demonstrate an authorized AI tool (e.g., gemini-cli) to automatically generate unit tests.
    • Workflow Integration: Define and document a new unit test automation workflow that seamlessly integrates the selected AI tool into the existing Agama development pipeline.
    • Knowledge Sharing: Establish a set of best practices for using AI in code generation, sharing the learned expertise with the broader team.

    Contribution & Resources

    We are seeking contributors interested in AI-powered development and improving developer efficiency. Whether you have previous experience with code generation tools or are eager to learn, your participation is highly valuable.

    If you want to dive deep into AI for software quality, please reach out and join the effort!

    • Authorized AI Tools: Tools supported by SUSE (e.g., gemini-cli)
    • Focus Areas: Rust, TypeScript, and Ruby components within the Agama project.

    Interesting Links

    Multi-agent AI assistant for Linux troubleshooting by doreilly

    Description

    Explore multi-agent architecture as a way to avoid MCP context rot.

    Having one agent with many tools bloats the context with low-level details about tool descriptions, parameter schemas etc which hurts LLM performance. Instead have many specialised agents, each with just the tools it needs for its role. A top level supervisor agent takes the user prompt and delegates to appropriate sub-agents.

    Goals

    Create an AI assistant with some sub-agents that are specialists at troubleshooting Linux subsystems, e.g. systemd, selinux, firewalld etc. The agents can get information from the system by implementing their own tools with simple function calls, or use tools from MCP servers, e.g. a systemd-agent can use tools from systemd-mcp.

    Example prompts/responses:

    user$ the system seems slow
assistant$ process foo with pid 12345 is using 1000% cpu ...

user$ I can't connect to the apache webserver
assistant$ the firewall is blocking http ... you can open the port with firewall-cmd --add-port ...

    Resources

    Language Python. The Python ADK is more mature than Golang.

    https://google.github.io/adk-docs/

    https://github.com/djoreilly/linux-helper

    Backporting patches using LLM by jankara

    Description

    Backporting Linux kernel fixes (either for CVE issues or as part of general git-fixes workflow) is boring and mostly mechanical work (dealing with changes in context, renamed variables, new helper functions etc.). The idea of this project is to explore usage of LLM for backporting Linux kernel commits to SUSE kernels using LLM.

    Goals

    • Create safe environment allowing LLM to run and backport patches without exposing the whole filesystem to it (for privacy and security reasons).
    • Write prompt that will guide LLM through the backporting process. Fine tune it based on experimental results.
    • Explore success rate of LLMs when backporting various patches.

    Resources

    • Docker
    • Gemini CLI

    Repository

    Current version of the container with some instructions for use are at: https://gitlab.suse.de/jankara/gemini-cli-backporter

    SUSE Observability MCP server by drutigliano

    Description

    The idea is to implement the SUSE Observability Model Context Protocol (MCP) Server as a specialized, middle-tier API designed to translate the complex, high-cardinality observability data from StackState (topology, metrics, and events) into highly structured, contextually rich, and LLM-ready snippets.

    This MCP Server abstract the StackState APIs. Its primary function is to serve as a Tool/Function Calling target for AI agents. When an AI receives an alert or a user query (e.g., "What caused the outage?"), the AI calls an MCP Server endpoint. The server then fetches the relevant operational facts, summarizes them, normalizes technical identifiers (like URNs and raw metric names) into natural language concepts, and returns a concise JSON or YAML payload. This payload is then injected directly into the LLM's prompt, ensuring the final diagnosis or action is grounded in real-time, accurate SUSE Observability data, effectively minimizing hallucinations.

    Goals

    • Grounding AI Responses: Ensure that all AI diagnoses, root cause analyses, and action recommendations are strictly based on verifiable, real-time data retrieved from the SUSE Observability StackState platform.
    • Simplifying Data Access: Abstract the complexity of StackState's native APIs (e.g., Time Travel, 4T Data Model) into simple, semantic functions that can be easily invoked by LLM tool-calling mechanisms.
    • Data Normalization: Convert complex, technical identifiers (like component URNs, raw metric names, and proprietary health states) into standardized, natural language terms that an LLM can easily reason over.
    • Enabling Automated Remediation: Define clear, action-oriented MCP endpoints (e.g., execute_runbook) that allow the AI agent to initiate automated operational workflows (e.g., restarts, scaling) after a diagnosis, closing the loop on observability.

     Hackweek STEP

    • Create a functional MCP endpoint exposing one (or more) tool(s) to answer queries like "What is the health of service X?") by fetching, normalizing, and returning live StackState data in an LLM-ready format.

     Scope

    • Implement read-only MCP server that can:
      • Connect to a live SUSE Observability instance and authenticate (with API token)
      • Use tools to fetch data for a specific component URN (e.g., current health state, metrics, possibly topology neighbors, ...).
      • Normalize response fields (e.g., URN to "Service Name," health state DEVIATING to "Unhealthy", raw metrics).
      • Return the data as a structured JSON payload compliant with the MCP specification.

    Deliverables

    • MCP Server v0.1 A running Golang MCP server with at least one tool.
    • A README.md and a test script (e.g., curl commands or a simple notebook) showing how an AI agent would call the endpoint and the resulting JSON payload.

    Outcome A functional and testable API endpoint that proves the core concept: translating complex StackState data into a simple, LLM-ready format. This provides the foundation for developing AI-driven diagnostics and automated remediation.

    Resources

    • https://www.honeycomb.io/blog/its-the-end-of-observability-as-we-know-it-and-i-feel-fine
    • https://www.datadoghq.com/blog/datadog-remote-mcp-server
    • https://modelcontextprotocol.io/specification/2025-06-18/index
    • https://modelcontextprotocol.io/docs/develop/build-server

     Basic implementation

    • https://github.com/drutigliano19/suse-observability-mcp-server

    Results

    Successfully developed and delivered a fully functional SUSE Observability MCP Server that bridges language models with SUSE Observability's operational data. This project demonstrates how AI agents can perform intelligent troubleshooting and root cause analysis using structured access to real-time infrastructure data.

    Example execution

    The Agentic Rancher Experiment: Do Androids Dream of Electric Cattle? by moio

    Rancher is a beast of a codebase. Let's investigate if the new 2025 generation of GitHub Autonomous Coding Agents and Copilot Workspaces can actually tame it. A GitHub robot mascot trying to lasso a blue bull with a Kubernetes logo tatooed on it

    The Plan

    Create a sandbox GitHub Organization, clone in key Rancher repositories, and let the AI loose to see if it can handle real-world enterprise OSS maintenance - or if it just hallucinates new breeds of Kubernetes resources!

    Specifically, throw "Agentic Coders" some typical tasks in a complex, long-lived open-source project, such as:


    ❥ The Grunt Work: generate missing GoDocs, unit tests, and refactorings. Rebase PRs.

    ❥ The Complex Stuff: fix actual (historical) bugs and feature requests to see if they can traverse the complexity without (too much) human hand-holding.

    ❥ Hunting Down Gaps: find areas lacking in docs, areas of improvement in code, dependency bumps, and so on.


    If time allows, also experiment with Model Context Protocol (MCP) to give agents context on our specific build pipelines and CI/CD logs.

    Why?

    We know AI can write "Hello World." and also moderately complex programs from a green field. But can it rebase a 3-month-old PR with conflicts in rancher/rancher? I want to find the breaking point of current AI agents to determine if and how they can help us to reduce our technical debt, work faster and better. At the same time, find out about pitfalls and shortcomings.

    The CONCLUSION!!!

    A add-emoji State of the Union add-emoji document was compiled to summarize lessons learned this week. For more gory details, just read on the diary below! add-emoji

    Self-Scaling LLM Infrastructure Powered by Rancher by ademicev0

    Self-Scaling LLM Infrastructure Powered by Rancher

    logo

    Description

    The Problem

    Running LLMs can get expensive and complex pretty quickly.

    Today there are typically two choices:

    1. Use cloud APIs like OpenAI or Anthropic. Easy to start with, but costs add up at scale.
    2. Self-host everything - set up Kubernetes, figure out GPU scheduling, handle scaling, manage model serving... it's a lot of work.

    What if there was a middle ground?

    What if infrastructure scaled itself instead of making you scale it?

    Can we use existing Rancher capabilities like CAPI, autoscaling, and GitOps to make this simpler instead of building everything from scratch?

    Project Repository: github.com/alexander-demicev/llmserverless

    What This Project Does

    A key feature is hybrid deployment: requests can be routed based on complexity or privacy needs. Simple or low-sensitivity queries can use public APIs (like OpenAI), while complex or private requests are handled in-house on local infrastructure. This flexibility allows balancing cost, privacy, and performance - using cloud for routine tasks and on-premises resources for sensitive or demanding workloads.

    A complete, self-scaling LLM infrastructure that:

    • Scales to zero when idle (no idle costs)
    • Scales up automatically when requests come in
    • Adds more nodes when needed, removes them when demand drops
    • Runs on any infrastructure - laptop, bare metal, or cloud

    Think of it as "serverless for LLMs" - focus on building, the infrastructure handles itself.

    How It Works

    A combination of open source tools working together:

    Flow:

    • Users interact with OpenWebUI (chat interface)
    • Requests go to LiteLLM Gateway
    • LiteLLM routes requests to:
      • Ollama (Knative) for local model inference (auto-scales pods)
      • Or cloud APIs for fallback

    Explore LLM evaluation metrics by thbertoldi

    Description

    Learn the best practices for evaluating LLM performance with an open-source framework such as DeepEval.

    Goals

    Curate the knowledge learned during practice and present it to colleagues.

    -> Maybe publish a blog post on SUSE's blog?

    Resources

    https://deepeval.com

    https://docs.pactflow.io/docs/bi-directional-contract-testing

    SUSE Observability MCP server by drutigliano

    Description

    The idea is to implement the SUSE Observability Model Context Protocol (MCP) Server as a specialized, middle-tier API designed to translate the complex, high-cardinality observability data from StackState (topology, metrics, and events) into highly structured, contextually rich, and LLM-ready snippets.

    This MCP Server abstract the StackState APIs. Its primary function is to serve as a Tool/Function Calling target for AI agents. When an AI receives an alert or a user query (e.g., "What caused the outage?"), the AI calls an MCP Server endpoint. The server then fetches the relevant operational facts, summarizes them, normalizes technical identifiers (like URNs and raw metric names) into natural language concepts, and returns a concise JSON or YAML payload. This payload is then injected directly into the LLM's prompt, ensuring the final diagnosis or action is grounded in real-time, accurate SUSE Observability data, effectively minimizing hallucinations.

    Goals

    • Grounding AI Responses: Ensure that all AI diagnoses, root cause analyses, and action recommendations are strictly based on verifiable, real-time data retrieved from the SUSE Observability StackState platform.
    • Simplifying Data Access: Abstract the complexity of StackState's native APIs (e.g., Time Travel, 4T Data Model) into simple, semantic functions that can be easily invoked by LLM tool-calling mechanisms.
    • Data Normalization: Convert complex, technical identifiers (like component URNs, raw metric names, and proprietary health states) into standardized, natural language terms that an LLM can easily reason over.
    • Enabling Automated Remediation: Define clear, action-oriented MCP endpoints (e.g., execute_runbook) that allow the AI agent to initiate automated operational workflows (e.g., restarts, scaling) after a diagnosis, closing the loop on observability.

     Hackweek STEP

    • Create a functional MCP endpoint exposing one (or more) tool(s) to answer queries like "What is the health of service X?") by fetching, normalizing, and returning live StackState data in an LLM-ready format.

     Scope

    • Implement read-only MCP server that can:
      • Connect to a live SUSE Observability instance and authenticate (with API token)
      • Use tools to fetch data for a specific component URN (e.g., current health state, metrics, possibly topology neighbors, ...).
      • Normalize response fields (e.g., URN to "Service Name," health state DEVIATING to "Unhealthy", raw metrics).
      • Return the data as a structured JSON payload compliant with the MCP specification.

    Deliverables

    • MCP Server v0.1 A running Golang MCP server with at least one tool.
    • A README.md and a test script (e.g., curl commands or a simple notebook) showing how an AI agent would call the endpoint and the resulting JSON payload.

    Outcome A functional and testable API endpoint that proves the core concept: translating complex StackState data into a simple, LLM-ready format. This provides the foundation for developing AI-driven diagnostics and automated remediation.

    Resources

    • https://www.honeycomb.io/blog/its-the-end-of-observability-as-we-know-it-and-i-feel-fine
    • https://www.datadoghq.com/blog/datadog-remote-mcp-server
    • https://modelcontextprotocol.io/specification/2025-06-18/index
    • https://modelcontextprotocol.io/docs/develop/build-server

     Basic implementation

    • https://github.com/drutigliano19/suse-observability-mcp-server

    Results

    Successfully developed and delivered a fully functional SUSE Observability MCP Server that bridges language models with SUSE Observability's operational data. This project demonstrates how AI agents can perform intelligent troubleshooting and root cause analysis using structured access to real-time infrastructure data.

    Example execution

    "what is it" file and directory analysis via MCP and local LLM, for console and KDE by rsimai

    Description

    Users sometimes wonder what files or directories they find on their local PC are good for. If they can't determine from the filename or metadata, there should an easy way to quickly analyze the content and at least guess the meaning. An LLM could help with that, through the use of a filesystem MCP and to-text-converters for typical file types. Ideally this is integrated into the desktop environment but works as well from a console. All data is processed locally or "on premise", no artifacts remain or leave the system.

    Goals

    • The user can run a command from the console, to check on a file or directory
    • The filemanager contains the "analyze" feature within the context menu
    • The local LLM could serve for other use cases where privacy matters

    TBD

    • Find or write capable one-shot and interactive MCP client
    • Find or write simple+secure file access MCP server
    • Create local LLM service with appropriate footprint, containerized
    • Shell command with options
    • KDE integration (Dolphin)
    • Package
    • Document

    Resources

    Backporting patches using LLM by jankara

    Description

    Backporting Linux kernel fixes (either for CVE issues or as part of general git-fixes workflow) is boring and mostly mechanical work (dealing with changes in context, renamed variables, new helper functions etc.). The idea of this project is to explore usage of LLM for backporting Linux kernel commits to SUSE kernels using LLM.

    Goals

    • Create safe environment allowing LLM to run and backport patches without exposing the whole filesystem to it (for privacy and security reasons).
    • Write prompt that will guide LLM through the backporting process. Fine tune it based on experimental results.
    • Explore success rate of LLMs when backporting various patches.

    Resources

    • Docker
    • Gemini CLI

    Repository

    Current version of the container with some instructions for use are at: https://gitlab.suse.de/jankara/gemini-cli-backporter