Skip to main content
Glama

remote_list

List all remote repositories in a specified Git repository path using the Git MCP Server for enhanced Git operations.

Instructions

List remotes

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathNoPath to repository. MUST be an absolute path (e.g., /Users/username/projects/my-repo)

Implementation Reference

  • The primary handler for the 'remote_list' tool. It validates the repository path, executes 'git remote -v', formats the output, and handles caching.
    static async remoteList(options: BasePathOptions, context: GitToolContext): Promise<GitToolResult> {
      const path = this.getPath(options);
      return await this.executeOperation(
        context.operation,
        path,
        async () => {
          const { path: repoPath } = PathValidator.validateGitRepo(path);
          const result = await CommandExecutor.executeGitCommand(
            'remote -v',
            context.operation,
            repoPath
          );
    
          const output = result.stdout.trim();
          return {
            content: [{
              type: 'text',
              text: output || 'No remotes configured'
            }]
          };
        },
        {
          useCache: true,
          stateType: RepoStateType.REMOTE,
          command: 'remote -v'
        }
      );
    }
  • Defines the MCP input schema for the 'remote_list' tool, specifying the optional 'path' parameter.
      name: 'remote_list',
      description: 'List remotes',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          path: {
            type: 'string',
            description: `Path to repository. ${PATH_DESCRIPTION}`,
          },
        },
        required: [],
      },
    },
  • Dispatches execution of the 'remote_list' tool to the GitOperations.remoteList handler after validating arguments with isPathOnly.
    case 'remote_list': {
      const validArgs = this.validateArguments(operation, args, isPathOnly);
      return await GitOperations.remoteList(validArgs, context);
    }
Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'List remotes' gives no information about output format (e.g., structured list vs. raw text), error conditions (e.g., invalid repository path), side effects (none expected for listing), or performance characteristics. This is inadequate for a tool with even basic functionality.

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 maximally concise at two words with no wasted text. It's front-loaded with the core action ('List remotes') and contains no unnecessary elaboration. While under-specified, it achieves perfect conciseness within its limited scope.

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 tool's moderate complexity (Git operation with one parameter) and absence of both annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain what 'remotes' are in Git context, what information is returned, or how this tool fits within the Git workflow alongside siblings like 'remote_add' and 'push'. The agent would struggle to use this effectively.

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?

The description adds no parameter information beyond what the schema provides. However, schema description coverage is 100% (the 'path' parameter is fully documented in the schema), and there's only one optional parameter. This meets the baseline of 3 where the schema does the heavy lifting, though the description contributes zero additional value.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The description 'List remotes' is a tautology that restates the tool name 'remote_list' without adding meaningful context. It doesn't specify what 'remotes' are (Git remote repositories) or what information is listed (names, URLs, fetch/push specifications). While the verb 'List' is clear, the resource 'remotes' lacks specificity compared to sibling tools like 'remote_add' or 'remote_remove'.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an initialized Git repository), typical use cases (e.g., checking configured remotes before pushing), or relationships with sibling tools like 'remote_add' for adding remotes or 'clone' for initial remote setup. The agent receives zero contextual direction.

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

Related 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/Sheshiyer/git-mcp-v2'

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