docs: give the org profile an accurate picture of the public repos - #10
Merged
Conversation
The org landing page listed two repos, and both entries were wrong. One pointed at a repo that is not public, so every visitor got a 404 and the row disclosed a non-public repo's name and internal interfaces. The other described the SDK in the singular, from back when it was one library; it now publishes eight packages across eight registries. Seven of the nine public repos were missing entirely. Replace the table with the full set, grouped by what a visitor is actually looking for: SDKs (with a verified install line per registry), the MCP and n8n integrations, the standalone script repos, the MOCA clients, and this repo. Every package listed was checked live against its registry. The MCP server and n8n node are on 0.1.0 and not yet on npm, so they get a link and a description but no install command that would fail. Also correct the same stale claim in the root README, which named a non-public repo and a since-renamed one as the justification for keeping this repo public. The reasoning holds; the examples did not. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <[email protected]>
RobFaustLZ
approved these changes
Sep 1, 2026
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
What
The org landing page (
profile/README.md, which renders at https://github.com/labelzoom) listed two repos. Both entries were wrong, and seven of the nine public repos were missing.labelzoom-sdkas a single "Client SDK." It now publishes eight packages across eight registries plus a versioned conformance contract.Now
All nine public repos, grouped by what a visitor is actually after: SDKs with a per-registry install line, the MCP and n8n integrations, the standalone script repos, the MOCA clients, and this repo.
Every claim was verified live rather than taken from a manifest:
LabelZoom.Sdk1.0.0@labelzoom/sdk1.0.0com.labelzoom:labelzoom-sdk1.0.0labelzoom-sdk1.0.0labelzoom/sdkv1.0.0labelzoom-sdk/gogo/v1.0.0labelzoom1.0.0labelzoom1.0.0labelzoom-mcpandlabelzoom-n8n-nodeare on0.1.0and return "Not found" from the npm registry, so they get a link and a description but no install command that would fail. Worth noting separately:labelzoom-mcp's own README already instructsnpx -y labelzoom-mcp, which does not work today.The root
README.mdcarried the same stale claim — it named a non-public repo and a since-renamed one as the justification for keeping this repo public. The reasoning is still correct, so only the examples changed.Verification
curl, but so doserdeandexpressunder the same request — an anti-bot artifact, not a broken link; both packages were confirmed via their registry APIs.gh repo list labelzoom --json visibilityfiltered toPUBLIC— nine, no omissions, no extras.🤖 Generated with Claude Code