Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
github-workflow-mcp

github-workflow-mcp

by GHeeJeon
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

create_pr

Open a GitHub pull request from a specified branch, with custom title and body, merging into a target base branch.

Instructions

Open a GitHub Pull Request for the given branch.

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": {
      "title": "<title>",
      "body": "<body>",
      "branch": "<branch>"
    },
    "name": "create_pr"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
baseNoBase branch to merge into (default: main)
bodyYesPR body (markdown supported)
titleYesPR title
branchYesHead branch to merge from

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided. The description does not disclose behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, idempotency, side effects, or error cases, which is critical for a mutation tool.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the action. Efficient but could include more context without sacrificing conciseness.

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?

No output schema, no annotations, and minimal description for a tool with 4 parameters. Missing return value, error handling, and integration cues, making it incomplete.

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 each parameter. The description adds no additional semantic value beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline.

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 uses a specific verb 'Open' and resource 'GitHub Pull Request', clearly stating it operates on a branch. It differentiates from sibling tools like create_branch or create_issue.

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 on when to use this tool or when to avoid it. No mention of prerequisites or alternative tools among siblings, leaving the agent without decision context.

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