GitHub Health Monitor MCP
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| OLD_PR_DAYS | No | Days before PR considered old | 14 |
| GITHUB_TOKEN | No | GitHub PAT for authenticated requests | |
| STALE_BRANCH_DAYS | No | Days before branch considered stale | 30 |
| UNRESPONSIVE_ISSUE_DAYS | No | Days before issue needs attention | 7 |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| check_healthC | Check health metrics for a GitHub repository |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 1 tool
Only one tool exists, so there is no possibility of ambiguity or confusion with other tools.
With a single tool, naming consistency is trivially maintained. The verb_noun pattern 'check_health' is clear and descriptive.
A single tool for a health monitor feels too thin. Typically, a health monitoring server would benefit from multiple tools (e.g., listing checks, getting detailed metrics) to cover the domain.
The tool surface is severely incomplete. Only one health check tool cannot cover the full scope of monitoring repository health, such as different metric types or historical data.