Skip to main content
Glama

Keelen

by io.github.jamie7893

connect_github

Get the link that connects a GitHub account, so work can reach real repos.

Returns an `install_url` — send it to the user to open in a browser. They
pick the GitHub account/org, approve the install, and land on a "connected"
page; then poll get_onboarding_status() until github_connected is true. The
link expires in 10 minutes — call connect_github() again for a fresh one.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=false (action tool), openWorldHint=true (external side-effects), and idempotentHint=false. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond these: the returned install_url flow, that the user must complete approval in a browser, the 10-minute expiration, and the requirement to poll a separate tool for completion. No contradiction with annotations; the description enriches the behavioral picture appropriately.

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?

Three tight sentences: purpose, then the browser flow + polling step, then expiry. Front-loaded with the key outcome. Every sentence earns its place with zero waste or redundancy.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a 0-parameter auth-flow tool with an output schema present, the description is remarkably complete: it explains the return value (install_url), the complete user-side flow, the polling requirement tied to a sibling tool, and the expiry/retry behavior. There are no gaps in what an agent needs to know to correctly execute and follow up.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters with an empty schema, so the baseline is 4. The description carries the full explanatory burden on the operational side — what the tool returns (install_url), how it's used, and when to retry — which compensates fully for the absence of parameters. Nothing more needed.

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?

The description clearly states 'Get the link that connects a GitHub account, so work can reach real repos' — a specific verb (get) + resource (link connecting a GitHub account) + outcome (so work reaches repos). This clearly distinguishes it from all 33 sibling tools, none of which handle GitHub connection/auth.

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?

The description gives an explicit step-by-step workflow: send the install_url to the user, they pick an account/org and approve, then poll get_onboarding_status() until github_connected is true. It also names the alternative/next-step tool explicitly and states the 10-minute expiry with a retry instruction, covering when and how to use it.

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

All Keelen toolsInspect
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

A4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Every tool targets a distinct resource and action duo, even within clusters like request handling or security reviews. The get_ vs run_ pairs are clearly separated, and descriptions explicitly contrast confusing alternatives such as archive_project vs delete_project.

Naming Consistency4/5

The set overwhelmingly follows verb_noun snake_case (submit_request, list_projects, resolve_escalation). The one visible deviation is project_status, which breaks the get_/pattern, and signup is a single-word verb instead of sign_up.

Tool Count2/5

37 tools is well above the 25+ threshold and spans auth, billing, project lifecycle, roadmap, escalations, product documents, and multiple review types. Most tools earn their place, but the surface is too large for one server and would be more coherent split into focused servers.

Completeness4/5

The domain coverage is broad: full project lifecycle, request intake/refinement, roadmap manipulation, escalation handling, product doc read/write, and security/legal review flows. Minor gaps exist, most notably no dedicated task-listing or task-update tool, but agents can work around these via project_status and list_escalations.

Resources