Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
git-context-mcp

git-context-mcp

by TamiShaks-2
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

recent_activity

Analyzes recent git history to find files with significant changes, helping prioritize code review and maintenance.

Instructions

Analyzes recent git history to find 'hot' files.

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_path": "<repo_path>"
    },
    "name": "recent_activity"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nNo
repo_pathYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fails to disclose behavioral traits such as whether the tool is safe (read-only) or destructive, any authentication needs, or side effects. It only describes the basic operation.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded and concise with no wasted words. However, it could be more informative without becoming verbose.

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 has an output schema (not shown) and 2 parameters with no annotations, the description is too brief. It does not explain the meaning of 'hot' files, result limits, or any constraints, making it incomplete 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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description does not add meaning to the parameters 'repo_path' and 'n'. The purpose is implied but not explicitly linked to parameter roles.

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 the tool analyzes recent git history to find 'hot' files, which gives a specific action and resource. However, it does not clarify what 'hot' means (e.g., frequently changed, recently modified), leaving some ambiguity.

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 siblings like code_map or work_summary. The description implies a use case for identifying active files but lacks explicit context or alternatives.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools