github-fetcher

GitHub pull request

github_pr

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch a GitHub pull request's branches, stats, mergeability, and optionally up to 100 changed files with patches. Set include_files=true to retrieve file diffs.

Instructions

Read one pull request with branches, stats, mergeability, and optional changed files. Set include_files=true to fetch up to 100 files with patches.

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": {
      "repo": "<repo>",
      "number": "<number>"
    },
    "name": "github_pr"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`repo`	Yes	Repository in owner/name form
`fresh`	No	Bypass the local cache
`number`	Yes	Pull request number
`include_files`	No	Include up to 100 changed files

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 1, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond that — it discloses what the response contains (branches, stats, mergeability) and the 100-file cap with patches, though it never mentions the cache or the 'fresh' bypass behavior that materially affects results.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short sentences, zero filler, with the returned data front-loaded and the optional-files behavior trailing. Every clause carries information an agent needs.

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

Completeness4/5

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 convey the return shape, and it does so at a high level (branches, stats, mergeability, files with patches). The cache-bypass nuance for 'fresh' is left to the schema, which is acceptable but a minor gap for a read tool where cached staleness matters.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description earns a bump by adding 'with patches' to include_files, information the schema does not convey. It says nothing about 'fresh' or the caching implication, but the schema documents that parameter adequately.

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?

The description gives a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('one pull request') and enumerates the payload (branches, stats, mergeability, changed files), which separates it from the list-oriented sibling github_prs. It stops short of naming that sibling explicitly, so differentiation is implied 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?

The conditional 'Set include_files=true to fetch up to 100 files with patches' gives a clear usage cue for one parameter, but there is no guidance on when to choose this over github_prs (list) or github_issue, and no exclusions or prerequisites are stated. Usage must be inferred from the singular resource.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.