Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Secure Git MCP

Secure Git MCP

by IvanAbramovichWork
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

git_create_branch

Create a Git branch from a chosen base without changing working files, respecting repository path and project policy restrictions. Omit repo_path to use the configured repository.

Instructions

Create a branch without changing working files. 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_name": "<branch_name>"
    },
    "name": "git_create_branch"
  }
}

Input Schema

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

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2026.10.19

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent and closed-world, so the safety profile is largely covered. The description adds genuine value by clarifying that the working tree is untouched and that operations are constrained by project policy, but the policy clause is too vague to act on and no return behavior is described.

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 short sentences with the key behavioral distinction front-loaded and no filler. The trailing policy sentence is generic but doesn't bloat the definition.

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

Completeness3/5

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

With no output schema, the description should indicate what is returned (e.g., confirmation or the created ref), and it doesn't. The undocumented base_branch default is also a gap. It covers the repo_path constraint well, so it's adequate but not complete for a 3-parameter mutation tool.

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 only 33%, and the description compensates for repo_path (omit vs. explicit must match the fixed repo) but adds nothing about base_branch, whose default is undocumented in both schema and description. branch_name is self-evident. Partial compensation keeps this at the baseline.

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 ('Create a branch') and adds a scoping clause ('without changing working files') that implicitly separates it from git_checkout, which does switch the working tree. It doesn't name any sibling explicitly, so the differentiation is inferential rather than stated.

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?

"Omit repo_path to use the configured repository" gives concrete invocation guidance for one parameter, but there's no guidance on when to prefer this over git_checkout or what base_branch defaults to. Usage is implied rather than spelled out.

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