Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

github_repo_releases

List published releases for a GitHub repository by owner and repo name. Retrieve tag, title, URL, prerelease status, publication time, and author, with pagination.

Instructions

List a repository's releases. Lists the published releases of a GitHub repository, identified by the required owner and repo. Page with page and per_page (max 100). Each release has its tag name, title, URL, prerelease flag, publication time and author.

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

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does reasonably well: it discloses pagination with a hard max of 100 and enumerates the fields each release returns (tag, title, URL, prerelease flag, publication time, author). Missing are auth/prerequisite notes and whether drafts or non-published releases are excluded, but the return shape disclosure is valuable.

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 first, identification keys second, pagination and returned fields last. No filler.

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?

A read-only listing tool with no annotations and no output schema; the description compensates by covering inputs, pagination limits, and returned fields. Only minor gaps remain (auth requirements, draft handling).

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 coverage is 100%, so owner, repo, page, and per_page are already documented. The description restates the required pair and repeats the per_page max of 100, adding little syntax or format detail beyond the schema — correct baseline 3.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List a repository's releases') and immediately narrows scope to published releases of an owner/repo pair. It is clearly distinguishable from repo-adjacent siblings like forks or languages, though it does not name them explicitly.

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 by the resource description but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not statement, and no pointer to alternatives (e.g., for draft releases or asset details). The 'published releases' qualifier is the only scoping hint.

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