Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
deltaprobe

deltaprobe

by Deepthi-04
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Summarize pull request

summarize_pr
Read-only

Get a pull request overview—title, author, branches, labels, size, file types, review status, and CI results—without its diff to plan a review before reading code.

Instructions

Get an overview of a pull request without its diff: title, description, author, branches, labels, size, file types (source/test/docs/config/generated), most-touched areas, review status and CI check results. Call this first when reviewing a PR, then use get_pr_diff to read the code.

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": {
      "owner": "<owner>",
      "repo": "<repo>",
      "pullNumber": "<pullNumber>"
    },
    "name": "summarize_pr"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
repoYesRepository name, e.g. 'next.js'
ownerYesRepository owner (user or org), e.g. 'vercel'
pullNumberYesPull request number

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The read-only annotations already cover the safety profile, and the description adds meaningful scope disclosure: it explicitly excludes the diff, which prevents an agent from expecting code content. It also lists what is computed (file-type breakdown, most-touched areas, CI results), though it says nothing about cost, rate limits, or freshness of CI data.

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?

Two sentences, zero preamble, with the scope constraint front-loaded before the workflow guidance. The long enumeration of returned fields is dense but justified given there is no output schema; a slightly tighter grouping would make it easier to scan.

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 takes on the burden of describing return content and does so comprehensively, covering metadata, computed summaries, review state, and CI results. Combined with the ordering guidance, 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.

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% with clear per-parameter descriptions for owner, repo, and pullNumber, so the schema carries parameter semantics entirely. The description adds no format or constraint detail beyond that, which matches the baseline for fully documented schemas.

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 names a specific verb and resource ("Get an overview of a pull request") and immediately scopes it with "without its diff", then enumerates the returned facets (title, author, branches, file types, review status, CI checks). This makes it clearly distinct from get_pr_diff, which is named as the complement.

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?

It gives explicit ordering guidance: "Call this first when reviewing a PR, then use get_pr_diff to read the code." Both the when and the named alternative are stated, leaving nothing for the agent to infer.

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