wrapped routes in suspense boundaries

[Gaurav-Narayan-Varma]

No description provided.

[changeset-bot]

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: d848a24

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
agents-api	Ready	Preview, Comment	Feb 15, 2026 10:30pm
agents-manage-ui	Ready	Preview, Comment	Feb 15, 2026 10:30pm

1 Skipped Deployment

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
agents-docs	Skipped		Feb 15, 2026 10:30pm

[claude]

PR Review Summary

(0) Total Issues | Risk: Low

💭 Consider (1) 💭

Inline Comments:

• 💭 Consider: loading.tsx:3 Function naming could use descriptive name (McpServerDetailLoading) to match detail-page loading convention

---

✅ APPROVE

Summary: Clean PR adding Suspense boundary loading states for the breadcrumbs parallel route and MCP server detail page. The skeleton structures appropriately mirror the actual page layouts, and the implementation follows established patterns in the codebase. The only observation is a minor naming convention preference — totally optional to address. Ship it! 🚀

Discarded (1)

Location	Issue	Reason Discarded
loading.tsx	Mixed styling approach (Tailwind classes vs inline style={{ width: N }})	Consistent with existing codebase patterns; the reviewer noted LOW confidence and explicitly stated it's "not a blocking issue"

Reviewers (3)

Reviewer	Returned	Main Findings	Consider	While You're Here	Inline Comments	Pending Recs	Discarded
pr-review-frontend	1	0	0	0	0	0	1
pr-review-consistency	1	0	0	0	1	0	0
pr-review-standards	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Total	2	0	0	0	1	0	1

[claude]

💭 Consider: Naming convention for detail-page loading components

Issue: This uses the generic name Loading(), while the codebase convention for detail-level loading components (routes with dynamic segments like [agentId], [installationId]) tends to use semantically descriptive function names.

Why: Descriptive names aid debugging (React DevTools shows component names) and code navigation when searching the codebase.

Fix: Could rename to McpServerDetailLoading or McpServerLoading to match the naming pattern in peer files.

Refs:

• GitHubInstallationDetailLoading — uses descriptive naming
• AgentLoading — uses named FC pattern