Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Tulina

by ai.tulina.mcp
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

github_act

Destructive

⚠️ ACTS on a GitHub repository: creates a branch. Reading the repository and its branches is github_repos.

op='create_branch' is how a pull request is opened without a shell, in three steps:

  1. github_act(op='create_branch', branch='fix/x'), from ref;

  2. write the files with github_files(op='write', branch='fix/x', …) — branch is REQUIRED there, otherwise the commit lands on the default branch; GitHub refuses a write to a branch that does not exist;

  3. github_pulls(op='create') with the new branch as head.

⚠️ An existing branch is refused (422), never moved.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "op": "<op>"
    },
    "name": "github_act"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
opYescreate_branch.
refNothe branch name, or full 40-character commit SHA, to start from (default: the repository's default branch). A tag or a short SHA is not resolved.
_orgNoOrg (id) de CET APPEL. `oto_list_orgs()`.
repoNorepository name.
ownerNorepository owner.
_groupNoÉquipe (id) de CET APPEL, sous son org parente.
branchNothe new branch's name (`fix/x`, not `refs/heads/…`).
_run_idNoOBLIGATOIRE à chaque appel dès `run_start` ou `data_claim_next` : sans lui, l'écriture sur une ligne réservée est refusée. Hérité seulement si le serveur tient un run actif — n'y compte pas.
_accountNoCompte à OPÉRER parmi : `Julien` (org), `Tulina front` (org). `oto_identity(op='list')`.
_projectNoProjet (id) de CET APPEL — jeton PRIMAIRE. `oto_project(op='list')`.
_instanceNoInstance de connecteur PRÉCISE (un credential exact). `oto_instance(op='list')`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

No schema history has been recorded yet.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description adds concrete failure behavior beyond that: an existing branch is refused with 422 and 'never moved', and GitHub refuses a write to a nonexistent branch. It does not discuss auth/permission requirements or what the call returns, but the destructive/refusal semantics are well covered.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The mutation warning and the one-line purpose are front-loaded, then the workflow is presented as numbered steps, which is easy to scan. Slightly verbose with warning emoji and cross-tool instructions, but nearly every sentence carries actionable information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For an 11-parameter write operation with no output schema, the description covers purpose, sequencing, preconditions and failure modes. The remaining platform-context parameters (`_org`, `_project`, `_run_id`, `_instance`) are documented in the schema itself, so the description does not need to repeat them, though how owner/repo are expected to be supplied is left implicit.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline would be 3, but the description adds genuine meaning by positioning `ref` as the start point and `branch` as the new head used by `github_pulls`. It also reinforces the `fix/x` versus `refs/heads/…` naming distinction in context of the workflow rather than as an isolated note.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('ACTS on a GitHub repository: creates a branch') and explicitly carves out the read path to `github_repos`, so the agent can distinguish it from its closest sibling without opening the schema. The scope is narrowed further by naming the only supported op, `create_branch`.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives an explicit three-step recipe (create branch → `github_files(op='write')` → `github_pulls(op='create')`) and names the sibling tools for each later step. It also states the conditional requirement that `branch` is mandatory on the file write or the commit lands on the default branch, which is exactly the kind of when/when-not guidance that prevents misuse.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Tulina toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources