Skip to main content
Glama

whichlib

by io.github.josifb
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Trending repositories

trending_repos
Read-only

Discover projects: the most-starred GitHub repositories created in the last day, week or month, or with period "rising" repositories of any age that gained the most stars this week (like GitHub Trending; risingRank keeps that order). Optionally one language; each scored and returned sorted by score (starsRank keeps the stars order). Each result has a 0-100 score (momentum 40% (stars gained per week; without history, lifetime stars per week scaled by the npm/PyPI download trend), maintenance 25%, adoption incl. npm/PyPI weekly downloads 25%, license 10%), a tier (Strong >=75, Solid >=50, Watch >=25, Avoid <25; New for repos under 30 days old, too new to judge), a one-line verdict and the full breakdown. Not the right tool for picking a dependency, since new repositories have little maintenance history; use recommend_repos for that. One GitHub search (rising: one download of the daily list from raw.githubusercontent.com instead), plus one npm/PyPI lookup per repository when withDownloads is true. Hosted: 50 free tool calls per day per user; send header X-GitHub-Token with your own GitHub token for unlimited use, or run the npm package locally (npx -y whichlib).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoHow many repositories to return, 1-100.
periodNo"day", "week" or "month": repos created in the last 24 hours, 7 days or 30 days. "rising": repos of any age by stars gained this week (the top 1,000 repos per language plus new ones are tracked).week
languageNoGitHub language name, e.g. "TypeScript", "Python", "Rust". Matches that language only. Omit for all languages.
withDownloadsNoAlso look up npm/PyPI weekly downloads for each repository. Slower: one registry lookup per repository.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only cover readOnly/openWorld; the description adds the real operational facts an agent needs: one GitHub search (or a raw.githubusercontent.com download for rising), one npm/PyPI lookup per repo when withDownloads is true, and a 50-calls/day quota with the X-GitHub-Token header or local npx fallback. It also discloses return semantics (0-100 score, weightings, tier thresholds, verdict, breakdown), far beyond what annotations provide.

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?

Purpose and the key exclusion are front-loaded in the first sentences, and every later sentence (call budget, scoring, tiers) carries usable information. It is dense and long, and the full scoring weightings could reasonably live in docs, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

With no output schema, the description fully covers the return shape (score, tier, verdict, breakdown), cost model, auth/quota, and alternative tool choice. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly and interpret the result.

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 is 3, but the description adds interpretation the schema lacks: that 'rising' tracks repos of any age via stars gained this week, and that risingRank/starsRank control the returned ordering. It does not restate limit or language beyond the schema's own text.

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 ('the most-starred GitHub repositories created in the last day, week or month') and contrasts with a named sibling ('use recommend_repos for that'). An agent can distinguish it from compare_repos/recommend_repos without opening a schema.

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?

Explicitly says when NOT to use it ('Not the right tool for picking a dependency, since new repositories have little maintenance history') and names the alternative (recommend_repos). It also explains what each period value selects and when withDownloads adds cost.

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

All whichlib toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources