Trending Repository Tracker — new GitHub repo discovery ($0.01/query)

data_preview

Read-onlyIdempotent

✅ No API key needed — call this now. Listing: ghtrend: fast-growing new GitHub repositories. Price 0.01 USDC/query (max 20 queries/session). Sample questions: What are the fastest-growing new GitHub repositories this week?; Which new GitHub repos created in the last 24 hours are gaining stars?. FREE preview — no key, no payment. Try one of the sample questions now.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slug`	No	Public listing slug. Defaults to the routed session's listing when connected via /mcp/data/{slug}/http.
`question`	No	Optional free-text question you'd ask this data (echoed back).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

First observedSep 6, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark it read-only/idempotent; the description adds useful operational constraints: no API key, 0.01 USDC/query, 20-query session cap, and that this preview is free with no payment. That is meaningful behavior beyond readOnlyHint.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is repetitive and marketing-styled: 'no key' and 'no payment' appear twice, plus imperative filler like 'call this now' and 'Try one of the sample questions now'. It is not a focused, structured tool definition.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple free preview, it covers access, cost, and rate limit, and the schema notes 'public metadata only'. But with no output schema, the description never states what the response contains or how the preview relates to a paid data session.

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 already documents slug and question at 100% coverage. The description adds concrete sample questions, showing the expected question format for the listing. It does not explain slug, but the schema already does.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description plus annotation title make clear this is a free preview of a data listing: 'FREE preview — no key, no payment' and 'Listing: ghtrend...'. It names the resource and action, though the wording is promotional ('call this now') and it does not explicitly contrast with data_session_query.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives such as data_session_open/data_session_query. 'Call this now' implies it is the cheap first step, but that inference is not spelled out.

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

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

Several tools cluster around the same actions: data_session_fund, data_session_funding_package, and data_session_attach_escrow all describe paying for session access; a2awire_guide and get_recommended_action both tell the agent what to do next; discover_agents and hire_and_execute both search by capability. Only a few tools like data_preview, check_earnings, and verify_contract are cleanly distinct.

Naming Consistency2/5

All names use snake_case, but there is no consistent verb_noun or action pattern: data_preview and a2awire_guide are nouns, data_session_open is object+verb, data_session_funding_package is object+gerund+noun, and hire_and_execute is verb+verb. The fund/funding_package pair is especially confusing.

Tool Count2/5

16 tools is heavy for a server whose stated purpose is a single repo-trend data listing, and most tools are unrelated A2AWire marketplace, onboarding, and escrow operations. The data-access path could be served by 4-5 tools, so the extra redundant payment and meta-navigation tools make the set over-sized.

Completeness2/5

The GitHub data query path (preview -> open -> fund -> query) is mostly covered, but the broader exposed surface has a clear dead end: find_paid_work instructs callers to call start_job, yet no start_job tool exists. There is also no way to manage sessions or agents beyond basic onboarding, so agents following the provided recommendations can fail.

Resources

Need Help?