Skip to main content
Glama
AleBrito124356

mcp-secret-sentinel

by AleBrito124356
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

scan_git_history

Read-onlyIdempotent

Scan Git history to find exposed secrets, including deleted credentials, tagging each finding with the commit hash that introduced it.

Instructions

Scan the lines added by the most recent commits (git log -p).

Each finding is tagged with the short hash of the commit that introduced it. A secret that was later deleted is still reported — history retains it, so the credential must be rotated regardless.

Args: repo_path: Absolute path to a git repository (or any path inside one). max_commits: How many commits back to inspect (default 50). all_branches: Walk every branch, tag and the stash instead of only the history of HEAD (default false). max_findings: List at most this many findings, most severe first (default 200, 0 = no limit). When capped, the result adds truncated, total_findings, counts_by_severity, counts_by_pattern and top_files.

Returns: The standard redacted findings report, with a "commit" field on each finding.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
repo_pathYes
max_commitsNo
all_branchesNo
max_findingsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only/idempotent/non-destructive, yet the description adds genuinely new behavior: deleted secrets are still reported because history retains them, and it discloses the truncation contract and the extra fields (truncated, total_findings, counts_by_severity, etc.) returned when capped.

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?

Front-loaded purpose sentence followed by two high-value behavioral notes and structured Args/Returns. Every line adds meaning; nothing is padding.

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 Returns section (redacted findings report with a commit field plus truncation fields) fully describes the response, and all four parameters are explained. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden and does so well: repo_path accepts any path inside a repo, max_commits default 50, all_branches walks every branch/tag/stash vs HEAD only, max_findings default 200 with 0 = no limit.

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?

Specific verb+resource+method: 'Scan the lines added by the most recent commits (git log -p)'. It distinguishes itself from scan_git_staged and scan_git_range by scoping to HEAD's recent history, and the commit-tagging rule clarifies what is being read.

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?

Usage is implied ('most recent commits') and the all_branches flag hints at scope, but with close siblings (scan_git_staged, scan_git_range) the description never states when to choose this tool over them or any exclusions. No explicit routing guidance.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools