github-fetcher

GitHub tree

github_tree

Read-onlyIdempotent

List files and directories in a GitHub repository at a branch, tag, or commit, with optional recursive full-tree retrieval.

Instructions

List files and directories in a repository at a ref, using the git trees API. Use recursive=true only when the full tree is needed.

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>"
    },
    "name": "github_tree"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ref`	No	Branch, tag, or commit; defaults to the repository default branch
`path`	No	Subdirectory path inside the ref
`repo`	Yes	Repository in owner/name form
`fresh`	No	Bypass the local cache
`recursive`	No	Return the complete tree recursively
`max_entries`	No	Maximum entries returned, default 1000

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.2.1Nov 7, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / max_entries

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Maximum entries returned, default 1000",
+  "maximum": 10000,
+  "minimum": 1,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

First observedv0.1.0Nov 1, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the git trees API reference and a recursive caveat, but does not discuss pagination, truncation, cache behavior, or response shape beyond what annotations and schema provide.

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 tightly written sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the recursive caveat follows immediately as actionable guidance.

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?

For a read-only tool with six parameters and no output schema, the description gives enough to identify the operation and make a basic recursive/non-recursive choice. However, it does not explain the return format, truncation behavior when max_entries is reached, or how caching affects results, which would help an agent invoke it correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all six parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description adds a mild caution about when to use recursive=true and implies the ref scope, but offers no syntax or format details beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List files and directories in a repository at a ref.' It clearly describes a tree-listing operation, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like github_file or github_search_code.

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 only usage guidance is 'Use recursive=true only when the full tree is needed,' which helps with parameter choice but does not explain when to choose this tool over alternatives such as github_file or github_search_code. Usage is implied by the description rather than fully directed.

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