Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

api-changelog-tracker

by io.github.lazymac2x
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

diff_versions

Compare changelog state between two dates for an API. Shows what was added or removed in the range.

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": {
      "api_id": "<api_id>",
      "from_date": "<from_date>",
      "to_date": "<to_date>"
    },
    "name": "diff_versions"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
api_idYes
to_dateYesEnd date (ISO 8601)
from_dateYesStart date (ISO 8601)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / api_id / description
      Removed value: -"API identifier to diff"
    • changedInput schema / properties / from_date / description
      Previous value: -"Start date for diff (ISO 8601)"New value: +"Start date (ISO 8601)"
    • changedInput schema / properties / to_date / description
      Previous value: -"End date for diff (ISO 8601)"New value: +"End date (ISO 8601)"
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It transparently states the operation is a comparison that outputs added/removed items, which covers core behavior. However, it does not disclose potential limitations like pagination, sorting, or whether modifications are included, leaving some behavioral aspects opaque.

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?

The description is two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action ('Compare changelog state...') and then clarifying the output. Every word earns its place, with no redundant information.

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 3-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description gives a basic understanding of purpose and result (added/removed). However, it lacks detail on output format, edge cases, or any required context, making it only partially complete for a new agent.

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?

The input schema covers 67% of parameters with descriptions (from_date/to_date as ISO 8601). The tool description adds no parameter-specific details beyond implying api_id identifies the API and the dates set the range. This is adequate but does not substantially enhance the schema.

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 clearly states that the tool compares changelog state between two dates and shows what was added or removed, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like fetch_changelog (full retrieval) and detect_breaking_changes (impact analysis) by its time-bounded comparison, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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?

The description implies usage when a changelog diff over a date range is needed, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings or any exclusionary cases. No alternatives are mentioned, leaving the 'when' somewhat inferred.

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

All api-changelog-tracker toolsInspect
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