Skip to main content
Glama
PhialsBasement

GitHub MCP Server Plus

search_issues

Search GitHub issues and pull requests across repositories to find specific content using customizable filters and sorting options.

Instructions

Search for issues and pull requests across GitHub repositories

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qYes
orderNo
pageNo
per_pageNo
sortNo

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that executes the search_issues tool by querying the GitHub API for issues.
    export async function searchIssues(params: z.infer<typeof SearchIssuesSchema>) {
      return githubRequest(buildUrl("https://api.github.com/search/issues", params));
    }
  • Zod schema definition for search_issues tool input parameters, extending base SearchOptions.
    export const SearchIssuesOptions = SearchOptions.extend({
      sort: z.enum([
        "comments",
        "reactions",
        "reactions-+1",
        "reactions--1",
        "reactions-smile",
        "reactions-thinking_face",
        "reactions-heart",
        "reactions-tada",
        "interactions",
        "created",
        "updated",
      ]).optional(),
    });
    
    export const SearchCodeSchema = SearchOptions;
    export const SearchUsersSchema = SearchUsersOptions;
    export const SearchIssuesSchema = SearchIssuesOptions;
  • index.ts:143-147 (registration)
    Tool registration in the list of available tools.
    {
      name: "search_issues",
      description: "Search for issues and pull requests across GitHub repositories",
      inputSchema: zodToJsonSchema(search.SearchIssuesSchema),
    },
  • index.ts:292-298 (registration)
    Dispatch handler in the switch statement for calling the search_issues tool.
    case "search_issues": {
      const args = search.SearchIssuesSchema.parse(request.params.arguments);
      const results = await search.searchIssues(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?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action 'search' but doesn't describe what the search returns (e.g., paginated results, error handling, rate limits, or authentication needs). For a search tool with 5 parameters and no annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a search tool, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

Given the complexity of 5 parameters (including enums for 'order' and 'sort'), 0% schema description coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the search behavior, result format, or parameter usage, leaving critical gaps for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The schema description coverage is 0%, meaning none of the 5 parameters are documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any parameter semantics—it doesn't explain what 'q' represents (e.g., search query syntax), the meaning of 'order', 'page', 'per_page', or 'sort' options. This fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 verb 'search' and the resources 'issues and pull requests' with the scope 'across GitHub repositories', which is specific and actionable. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'list_issues' or 'search_code', which would require more precise differentiation to achieve a score of 5.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'list_issues' (for issues in a specific repository) or 'search_code' (for code search). There's no mention of prerequisites, context, 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/PhialsBasement/mcp-github-server-plus'

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