github-fetcher

GitHub issue and pull request search

github_search_issues

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search GitHub issues and pull requests using query syntax such as is:issue, is:pr, state:open, or repo:owner/name to find and filter relevant discussions.

Instructions

Search issues and pull requests with GitHub search syntax, such as is:issue, is:pr, state:open, or repo:owner/name. For per-repository aggregate counts, use github_repo_health.

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": "github_search_issues"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No	Page number, starting at 1
`sort`	No	Sort field
`fresh`	No	Bypass the local cache
`order`	No	Sort order
`query`	Yes	GitHub issue search query
`per_page`	No	Items per page, default 20

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing about rate-limit behavior, result pagination, or that the 'fresh' parameter bypasses a local cache — behavior an agent would want to know when re-running a query.

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 sentences, zero filler, with the core capability and the syntax examples front-loaded before the routing note. Every clause earns its place.

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 and six parameters, the description is sufficient to call the tool correctly and gives the one non-obvious piece (query syntax). It omits pagination expectations and the cache-bypass semantics of 'fresh', which would round it out for a search tool that may return many results.

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 baseline is 3; the description earns above that by giving concrete query syntax examples (is:issue, is:pr, state:open, repo:owner/name) that the schema's terse 'GitHub issue search query' does not. It adds no guidance on sort/order/page/per_page, but those are self-documented.

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

Purpose5/5

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

Specific verb ('Search') plus resource ('issues and pull requests'), with the distinguishing mechanism (GitHub search syntax) stated up front. This clearly separates it from sibling list-style tools like github_issues and github_prs, which don't take a search query.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly routes the aggregate-count case to github_repo_health, which is a real when-not clause. It stops short of contrasting with github_issues (list issues in a single repo) or github_search_code, leaving some sibling selection to inference.

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