Skip to main content
Glama

search_code

Search for code across GitHub repositories to find specific functions, patterns, or implementations within projects.

Instructions

Search for code across GitHub repositories

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qYes
orderNo
pageNo
per_pageNo

Implementation Reference

  • The core handler function that executes the GitHub API search/code endpoint using the provided parameters.
    export async function searchCode(github_pat: string, params: z.infer<typeof SearchCodeSchema>) {
      return githubRequest(github_pat, buildUrl("https://api.github.com/search/code", params));
    }
  • Zod schema definitions for validating input parameters of the search_code tool. SearchCodeSchema aliases SearchOptions, and _SearchCodeSchema adds github_pat for internal use.
    export const SearchCodeSchema = SearchOptions;
    export const _SearchCodeSchema = SearchCodeSchema.extend({
      github_pat: z.string().describe("GitHub Personal Access Token"),
    });
  • src/index.ts:144-147 (registration)
    Registration of the search_code tool in the listTools handler, including name, description, and input schema.
      name: "search_code",
      description: "Search for code across GitHub repositories",
      inputSchema: zodToJsonSchema(search.SearchCodeSchema),
    },
  • src/index.ts:455-462 (registration)
    Dispatch case in the callToolRequest handler that parses arguments and invokes the searchCode handler function.
    case "search_code": {
      const argsWithPat = search._SearchCodeSchema.parse(params.arguments);
      const { github_pat, ...args } = argsWithPat;
      const results = await search.searchCode(github_pat, args);
      return {
        content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(results, null, 2) }],
      };
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure but offers minimal information. It mentions searching but doesn't cover aspects like rate limits, authentication needs, result format, pagination behavior, or error conditions. This is inadequate for a search tool with 4 parameters.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that gets straight to the point with no wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a search tool and front-loads the core functionality effectively.

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?

For a search tool with 4 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how results are structured, or provide enough context about parameters and behavior for effective use.

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 0%, so parameters are undocumented in the schema. The description provides no information about what 'q', 'order', 'page', or 'per_page' mean or how they should be used. It fails to compensate for the schema's lack of documentation, leaving parameters semantically unclear.

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 clearly states the action ('Search for code') and resource ('across GitHub repositories'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'search_issues' or 'search_repositories' beyond the 'code' focus, which prevents a perfect score.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_issues' or 'search_repositories'. The description lacks any context about appropriate use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/MissionSquad/mcp-github'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server