Skip to main content
Glama

github_code_scanning_get_variant_analysis

Retrieves the summary of a CodeQL variant analysis for a repository to review code scanning results.

Instructions

Get the summary of a CodeQL variant analysis

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ownerYesowner
repoYesrepo
codeql_variant_analysis_idYescodeql_variant_analysis_id

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function for github_code_scanning_get_variant_analysis - makes a GET request to /repos/{owner}/{repo}/code-scanning/codeql/variant-analyses/{codeql_variant_analysis_id}
    handler: async (args: Record<string, any>) => {
      return githubRequest("GET", `/repos/${args.owner}/${args.repo}/code-scanning/codeql/variant-analyses/${args.codeql_variant_analysis_id}`, undefined, undefined);
    },
  • Schema definition for github_code_scanning_get_variant_analysis - defines input parameters (owner, repo, codeql_variant_analysis_id)
    name: "github_code_scanning_get_variant_analysis",
    description: "Get the summary of a CodeQL variant analysis",
    inputSchema: z.object({
      owner: z.string().describe("owner"),
      repo: z.string().describe("repo"),
      codeql_variant_analysis_id: z.string().describe("codeql_variant_analysis_id")
    }),
  • Tool registration in codeScanningTools array - defines name, description, inputSchema, and handler
    {
      name: "github_code_scanning_get_variant_analysis",
      description: "Get the summary of a CodeQL variant analysis",
      inputSchema: z.object({
        owner: z.string().describe("owner"),
        repo: z.string().describe("repo"),
        codeql_variant_analysis_id: z.string().describe("codeql_variant_analysis_id")
      }),
      handler: async (args: Record<string, any>) => {
        return githubRequest("GET", `/repos/${args.owner}/${args.repo}/code-scanning/codeql/variant-analyses/${args.codeql_variant_analysis_id}`, undefined, undefined);
      },
    },
  • Re-export of codeScanningTools from code-scanning module
    export { codeScanningTools } from "./code-scanning.js";
  • src/index.ts:64-64 (registration)
    Tool module registration with the 'code-scanning' category in the server
    { category: "code-scanning", tools: codeScanningTools },
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It states the tool returns a summary but omits whether it requires authentication, has side effects, or is read-only. This lack of detail reduces transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single concise sentence, which is efficient but borderline under-specified. It fits the conciseness criterion but loses points for not providing more useful information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema, the description should explain what the summary contains (e.g., results, status). It does not, and compared to similar tools, it lacks contextual completeness for an agent to reliably interpret the output.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage but parameter descriptions are merely the parameter names. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and identifies the resource 'summary of a CodeQL variant analysis'. It is clear about what the tool does, but does not differentiate from sibling tools like `github_code_scanning_get_variant_analysis_repo_task`.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision-support information.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Eyalm321/github-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server