Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Secure Git MCP

Secure Git MCP

by IvanAbramovichWork
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

git_branch

Read-onlyIdempotent

List branch names with optional contains/not-contains filters, using the configured repository when no path is given; results are limited by project policy.

Instructions

List branch names (not secret-scanned). Omit repo_path to use the configured repository. Results and operations are restricted according to project policy.

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": {
      "branch_type": "<branch_type>"
    },
    "name": "git_branch"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
containsNo
repo_pathNoOptional repository root. Omit to use the server's fixed repository. An explicit path must identify that same repository.
branch_typeYes
not_containsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2026.10.19

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, lowering the bar. The description does add non-obvious context: results are not secret-scanned, and results/operations are gated by project policy — a real constraint worth knowing. It stops short of describing result volume, pagination, or what happens when the policy forbids listing.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no filler. The mid-sentence "(not secret-scanned)" parenthetical is awkwardly placed but does not obscure meaning.

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?

With no output schema, the description must carry the load, yet it never states the return shape, whether filtering is applied, or what values the required `branch_type` accepts. For a 4-parameter tool with one required, undocumented parameter, an agent cannot reliably construct a call from this definition alone.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 25% — just `repo_path` is documented in the schema, and the description merely repeats it. The required `branch_type` parameter, which governs the entire result set, has no description, no enum, and no values named anywhere, and `contains`/`not_contains` filtering is never mentioned in the description.

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 branch names") with a scope note about secret scanning. It is clearly distinguishable from the mutating sibling git_create_branch, though it never clarifies local vs remote branches or what `branch_type` actually selects.

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?

The sentence "Omit repo_path to use the configured repository" gives a useful operational rule, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance and no comparison to siblings such as git_create_branch or git_log. Usage is only implied by the tool name and the verb "List".

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