git-remote-mcp

git_diff

Read a git diff from a local repository to inspect unstaged or staged changes. Specify an optional ref, range, or pathspec to view exactly the modifications you need.

Instructions

Read a git diff from the local repository.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "git_diff"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cwd`	No	Optional local working directory or repository path.
`ref`	No	Optional ref, range, or pathspec to diff.
`staged`	No	Use git diff --staged.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 11, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

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 behavioral burden. 'Read' implies read-only, but it never states what is diffed by default (unstaged working-tree changes), whether output is truncated for large diffs, or how the result is formatted. For a no-annotation tool this is a significant gap.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though the brevity borders on under-specification rather than genuine tightness.

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?

With no output schema, no annotations, and three all-optional parameters, the description should clarify the default diff target and return format. It leaves the agent to guess what a zero-argument call produces and how the diff is returned.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with cwd, ref, and staged each documented in the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, not even the default unstaged behavior implied by staged defaulting to false.

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?

States a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('git diff') scoped to 'the local repository'. It is unambiguous about the operation, but offers no differentiation from adjacent siblings like git_show or git_status, which could also surface change content to an agent unfamiliar with Git.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of alternatives such as git_show (a specific commit's diff) or git_status (working-tree summary). The agent must infer usage purely from the name.

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