Upstar

Emerging repositories

emerging

Read-onlyIdempotent

Small GitHub repositories (under 1,000 stars a week ago, at least 30 days old) gaining stars at least twice as fast as in a usual week, by that ratio; optionally in one topic. The same list as Upstar's Emerging page (or the topic's Emerging tab).

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`lang`	No	language of the names, descriptions and links Upstar writes: en (default at /mcp) or fr (default at /fr/mcp); repository descriptions stay as their authors wrote them
`limit`	No	how many repositories, 1 to 50 (10 by default)
`topic`	No	only this topic's emerging repositories (a slug from list_topics); all topics when empty
`detail`	No	compact (the default): each repository's rank, name, description, language, stars, gains and Upstar page; full adds its creation day, health level, topics with their ranks and GitHub address, list_topics its categories, and get_repo its 12-week history, GitHub topics, activity counts and every period's ranks	compact
`offset`	No	how many places of the ranking to pass over, for the next page (next_offset of the previous answer); 0 by default, at most the number of repositories ranked

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`lang`	Yes	language of names and descriptions written by Upstar (en or fr)
`repos`	Yes
`topic`	No
`ranked`	Yes	how many repositories are emerging (in the topic, when one is given)
`source`	Yes	the source to cite when using these figures
`method_url`	Yes	Upstar's page explaining how stars are counted and repositories ranked
`next_offset`	No	the offset of the next page; absent on the last one
`data_updated_at`	Yes	when Upstar last rebuilt its rankings from GitHub's data (UTC, RFC 3339): every figure is as of then

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 4, 2026

removedOutput schema / properties / left_out

Removed value: -{
-  "anyOf": [
-    {
-      "type": "null"
-    },
-    {
-      "additionalProperties": false,
-      "properties": {
-        "blocked": {
-          "description": "blocked by Upstar's moderation",
-          "type": "integer"
-        },
-        "count": {
-          "type": "integer"
-        },
-        "kept_out_by_review": {
-          "description": "reviewed, and not featured by Upstar",
-          "type": "integer"
-        },
-        "no_page": {
-          "description": "without an Upstar page this hour",
-          "type": "integer"
-        },
-        "out_of_place": {
-          "description": "judged out of place in this topic, or doubtful there, by Upstar's topic review (for a list across topics: in every one of their topics)",
-          "type": "integer"
-        },
-        "waiting_for_review": {
-          "description": "held until Upstar reviews their star growth or their content",
-          "type": "integer"
-        }
-      },
-      "required": [
-        "count"
-      ],
-      "type": "object"
-    }
-  ],
-  "description": "the repositories of this stretch of the ranking Upstar does not show, by reason: the ranks this answer skips"
-}

Changed1 schema field changedNov 4, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / left_out

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    },
+    {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "properties": {
+        "blocked": {
+          "description": "blocked by Upstar's moderation",
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "count": {
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "kept_out_by_review": {
+          "description": "reviewed, and not featured by Upstar",
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "no_page": {
+          "description": "without an Upstar page this hour",
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "out_of_place": {
+          "description": "judged out of place in this topic, or doubtful there, by Upstar's topic review (for a list across topics: in every one of their topics)",
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "waiting_for_review": {
+          "description": "held until Upstar reviews their star growth or their content",
+          "type": "integer"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "count"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "the repositories of this stretch of the ranking Upstar does not show, by reason: the ranks this answer skips"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedNov 4, 2026

removedOutput schema / properties / left_out

Removed value: -{
-  "anyOf": [
-    {
-      "type": "null"
-    },
-    {
-      "additionalProperties": false,
-      "properties": {
-        "blocked": {
-          "description": "blocked by Upstar's moderation",
-          "type": "integer"
-        },
-        "count": {
-          "type": "integer"
-        },
-        "kept_out_by_review": {
-          "description": "reviewed, and not featured by Upstar",
-          "type": "integer"
-        },
-        "no_page": {
-          "description": "without an Upstar page this hour",
-          "type": "integer"
-        },
-        "out_of_place": {
-          "description": "judged out of place in this topic, or doubtful there, by Upstar's topic review (for a list across topics: in every one of their topics)",
-          "type": "integer"
-        },
-        "waiting_for_review": {
-          "description": "held until Upstar reviews their star growth or their content",
-          "type": "integer"
-        }
-      },
-      "required": [
-        "count"
-      ],
-      "type": "object"
-    }
-  ],
-  "description": "the repositories of this stretch of the ranking Upstar does not show, by reason: the ranks this answer skips"
-}

First observedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare this to be a safe, idempotent, closed read, so the description is not obligated to restate that. Instead it adds the substantive behavioral fact the annotations cannot: the eligibility thresholds and the ratio-based ordering, which explain why qualifying repos appear and others do not. Pagination and expansion behavior are documented in the schema rather than the description, which is a reasonable division.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two sentences, with the qualifying criteria front-loaded and the web-page equivalence second. The parenthetical thresholds are dense but every clause carries selection-relevant information, and there is no filler or repetition of name/title.

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?

With an output schema present the description need not explain return values, and annotations cover the safety profile, so the remaining burden is defining what the list contains. It does that precisely, including the ordering dimension that makes offset paging meaningful. A brief note on when this differs from the trending sibling would close the last gap.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains lang, limit, topic, detail, and offset thoroughly, including next_offset semantics. The description adds only that topic filtering is optional and that ranking is by growth ratio, which is marginal value beyond the structured fields. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 gives an exact definition of the resource: small GitHub repos (under 1,000 stars a week ago, at least 30 days old) whose star growth this week is at least 2x their usual weekly rate, ranked by that ratio. It also names the exact web surface it mirrors (Upstar's Emerging page or a topic's Emerging tab), which tells an agent the contents are a curated ranking rather than a raw star-gain list. It never names a sibling such as trending or spotted_early, so differentiation is inferred from the criteria rather than stated.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

"optionally in one topic" implies the topic-scoped use case, and the "Upstar's Emerging page" reference hints at when the list is appropriate. There is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over trending, topic_ranking, or spotted_early, and no stated exclusions (for example, that large repos will not appear here).

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

All Upstar tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?