Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
agent-vitals

agent-vitals

by Keremozdemirra
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

search

Find GitHub AI agent tooling repositories by matching words in names, descriptions, or topics; filter by status, license, group, and stars to assess maintenance and licensing.

Instructions

Search the census by words in the repository name, description or topics, with optional filters, ranked by stars.

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "search"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
groupNo
limitNo
queryYes
statusNo
licenseNoan SPDX id such as MIT, or 'permissive' for any licence a stranger may ship under
min_starsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral load; it does disclose that results are ranked by star count and that matching spans name, description and topics, which is real added context. It says nothing about whether this is a read-only operation, page size defaults, or what the result set looks like beyond ordering.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler, covering verb, match scope, filtering and ordering. It is efficient but so compressed that it omits routing and filter meaning; brevity here costs information rather than trimming waste.

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?

Six parameters, 17% schema coverage, no annotations and no output schema make this a thin definition for the amount left unexplained. Nothing tells the agent what 'group' enumerates, how status values are derived, or what the default limit and returned fields are, so the description is not complete enough for correct invocation on the first try.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 17%, so most fields (group, status, limit, min_stars, query) are undocumented; however the description names the searchable fields the query maps to and states that the remaining parameters are filters, which orients usage. It still leaves the meaning of 'group', the status vocabulary and limit bounds to the enums and constraints alone.

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 ('Search') and resource ('the census'), plus the exact fields matched (repository name, description, topics) and the ranking rule (stars). It never distinguishes itself from the sibling tools lookup, candidates and summary, so an agent cannot be certain which entry point to pick.

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?

'with optional filters' hints that filters narrow a free-text search but gives no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of when lookup, candidates or summary would be the better call. The agent must infer routing from sibling names alone.

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