Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Secure Git MCP

Secure Git MCP

by IvanAbramovichWork
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

git_log

Read-onlyIdempotent

Show commit history for a repository, optionally filtered by paths and timestamps, while enforcing project path policies. Omit repo_path to use the configured repository.

Instructions

Show history visible under the path policy. Omit repo_path to use the configured repository. Results and operations are restricted according to project policy.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "git_log"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathsNo
max_countNo
repo_pathNoOptional repository root. Omit to use the server's fixed repository. An explicit path must identify that same repository.
end_timestampNo
start_timestampNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2026.10.19

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, closed-world, so the description adds little on safety. "Results and operations are restricted according to project policy" hints at a filtering regime but is too vague to act on — it doesn't say what gets filtered (paths? commits?) or what happens when a request falls outside policy.

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?

Three short sentences with no filler, and the repo_path default is front-loaded. But it is under-specified rather than concise — the space saved is spent on no useful parameter or usage 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?

A 5-parameter tool with 0 required params, no output schema, and 20% schema coverage needs the description to carry parameter meaning and return-shape expectations; it does neither. An agent cannot tell what a "history" entry looks like or how timestamps/paths are interpreted.

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 20% — just repo_path is documented. paths, max_count (default 10), start_timestamp and end_timestamp have no description anywhere, and the tool description doesn't compensate with format hints (e.g. ISO 8601 for timestamps, path semantics, count limits).

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"Show history" is a verb plus an ambiguous resource — history of what (commits, file versions, reflog?) is never stated. It gestures at git log semantics but never says "commit history" and gives no basis for distinguishing it from git_show, git_diff_revisions, or git_blame.

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?

The only guidance is "Omit repo_path to use the configured repository," which is a parameter instruction rather than a when-to-use rule. Nothing tells the agent when to reach for git_log instead of git_show or git_diff_revisions, nor any prerequisite for the path policy.

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