Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

github_repo_contributors

List a GitHub repository's contributors by owner and repo, ordered by contribution count, with pagination for large contributor lists.

Instructions

List a repository's contributors. Lists the contributors to a GitHub repository, identified by the required owner and repo, ordered by number of contributions. Page with page and per_page (max 100). Each contributor has their login, id, contribution count, profile URL and account type.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoPage number
repoYesRepository name
ownerYesRepository owner (user or org login)
per_pageNoResults per page (max 100)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.2.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the read-only listing behavior, contribution-count ordering, pagination with a max of 100, and the fields returned for each contributor. It stops short of mentioning auth requirements, rate limits, or private-repo behavior, so it is strong but not complete.

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?

The description is short and front-loaded with the core purpose. There is minor redundancy between the first two sentences, which both say the tool lists repository contributors.

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?

Because there is no output schema, the description appropriately lists the returned contributor fields: login, id, contribution count, profile URL, and account type. It is complete enough to select and invoke the tool, though it omits auth and private-repository context.

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 documents all four parameters, making 3 the baseline. The description reiterates that owner and repo are required and that per_page maxes at 100, but adds little about defaults or formatting beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List a repository's contributors.' It also identifies the required owner/repo inputs and makes the resource distinct from nearby GitHub repo endpoints such as forks, languages, and releases.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description never says when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or related sibling tools. An agent must infer usage entirely from the tool name and purpose sentence.

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