Skip to main content
Glama
Paulosouzx

Generate-documentation-MCP

by Paulosouzx

generate_documentation

Generate a Markdown documentation skeleton from Git changes. Use glob filtering, select diff source, and produce a template-based Markdown file with placeholders.

Instructions

Generate a Markdown documentation skeleton from Git changes.

Args: project_path: Path to the Git repository. Defaults to the server's current working directory (the project Claude Code is running in). include: Glob patterns; only matching changed files are documented (e.g. [".py", "src/**"]). If omitted, all changed files match. exclude: Glob patterns to drop from the result (e.g. [".css"]), applied after include. output_file: Path (relative to project_path, unless absolute) for the generated Markdown file. language: Skeleton language, "en" or "pt". title: Document title. Defaults to a language-appropriate title. template: Template name to render (see templates/ directory). mode: Diff source — "working_tree" (uncommitted changes, default), "commit" (a single commit), or "branch" (current branch vs base_branch). commit_hash: Commit to document when mode="commit". Defaults to HEAD. base_branch: Base branch to diff against when mode="branch" (uses base_branch...HEAD). Defaults to "origin/main".

Returns: {"success": bool, "output_file": str | None, "files_processed": int, "files_ignored": int, "error": str (only on failure)}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modeNoworking_tree
titleNo
excludeNo
includeNo
languageNoen
templateNodefault
base_branchNoorigin/main
commit_hashNo
output_fileNodocumentation.md
project_pathNo
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes the input parameters, default behaviors, and the return format (success, output_file, etc.). It does not disclose potential side effects like file creation or permissions needed, but the output_file parameter implies file creation. The behavioral scope is well-covered.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is structured as a docstring with a purpose sentence, parameter list, and return specification. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity (10 params). Each sentence adds value, though the template description could be more specific rather than directing to a directory. No wasted words.

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

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with 10 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, parameters with defaults and examples, return format, and behavior per mode. It allows the agent to invoke the tool correctly without external knowledge. The only minor omission is template options, but that does not hinder basic usage.

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 0%, so the description must explain all 10 parameters. It does so with per-parameter descriptions, defaults, and examples for include/exclude. The only minor gap is the template parameter: it references 'templates/' directory without listing available templates. Still, the semantics are largely complete.

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?

The description clearly states 'Generate a Markdown documentation skeleton from Git changes.' This is a specific verb+resource combination that precisely describes the tool's function. Even without sibling tools, the purpose is unambiguous.

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?

The description explains the three modes (working_tree, commit, branch) with default values, and gives guidance on include/exclude glob patterns with examples. It implicitly tells when to use each mode. However, it lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives (e.g., when not to use this tool). Overall, usage context is clear but not exhaustive.

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/Paulosouzx/mcp-gen-documentation'

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