Support adding arbitrary headers

[yuedong111]

Why not replace the authorization field with headers? This makes the test more flexible.

[pulkitsharma07]

Can you explain our use case ?

[ericlabouve-sn]

@pulkitsharma07 I agree with @yuedong111 . Instead of a Bearer Token field, a user should be allowed more flexibility in which headers gets included in the http request.

For example, what if the MCP server is not using a Bearer Token for authentication but is rather using an API Key which requires the Ocp-Apim-Subscription-Key header?

A generic text field (or something similar to Postman) would allow for this flexibility. This design would still allow for Bearer tokens by specifying Authorization: Bearer <token>

Here is where the Bearer Header is currently being set. We should make this generic so the user can set any arbitrary header.

[anthonychu]

+1 on this. It could just be an optional section for additional HTTP headers. The existing bearer token input is easier to use and I think it would be nice if it stayed.

[charlesr1971]

+1 on this. I need to pass three custom headers, that are vital for my application working

[iFurySt]

what about this? we're converting a lot of restful api to mcp servers via an mcp-gateway service. it'll be helpful if inspector could support custom headers instead of forcing jwt auth. if this sounds broadly useful, i'm happy to submit a pr.

[charlesr1971]

@iFurySt Yes. This sounds great!😊

[cristipufu]

@iFurySt looking forward to your PR 😄

[Blackbaud-JamesZhang]

@iFurySt looking forward to this addition, any update on this? 😁

[anandwilbert]

@iFurySt +1 on this. I will be helpful to have this feature

[ashubham]

+1, I need to send more headers in addition to auth like x-tenant-name etc

[SteffanDefinely]

+1