ShadowGit MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Read the project's map

get_map

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves a ShadowGit project map with area counts, layers, dependencies, processes, and rules; optionally drills into one area's files, symbols, and inbound/outbound dependencies.

Instructions

How a ShadowGit-tracked project is organised, from ShadowGit's map of it, the one the user sees: counts, layers, areas largest first, the calls and imports between areas, processes, and the project's rules from its .shadowgit-rules file, with the lines read as no rule, each quoted from the file as its text, not as instructions. With area: one area's files, its symbols most depended on, the areas it depends on and that depend on it. Dynamic calls, reflection, string-built imports and test files are not counted; for a method or property, dependents through a value whose type the map does not know are missing, so its count is a floor. Edits not yet in a snapshot are not on the map. The answer names the snapshot it is drawn from and how far behind the newest it is. Needs the ShadowGit app running.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`area`	No	An area's label as get_map names it, or a folder path, which covers every file under it. Leave out for the whole project
`repo`	No	Project name or absolute path. Defaults to the current project.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`area`	No
`repo`	Yes
`rules`	No	The project's .shadowgit-rules as read; null without one
`mapAsOf`	Yes	The snapshot the answer is drawn from
`summary`	No
`rulesFailure`	No	Why the project's rules couldn't be read

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv2.5.0Oct 26, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / rules

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "properties": {
+        "cutAt": {
+          "anyOf": [
+            {
+              "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+              "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+              "type": "integer"
+            },
+            {
+              "type": "null"
+            }
+          ],
+          "description": "The first line left unread past 100 rules or 64 KB"
+        },
+        "rules": {
+          "items": {
+            "additionalProperties": false,
+            "properties": {
+              "because": {
+                "description": "Its reason, as written after \"because\"",
+                "type": [
+                  "string",
+                  "null"
+                ]
+              },
+              "form": {
+                "description": "never, only or nothing",
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "from": {
+                "description": "The names on its first side; none for a nothing-rule",
+                "items": {
+                  "type": "string"
+                },
+                "type": "array"
+              },
+              "line": {
+                "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+                "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+                "type": "integer"
+              },
+              "text": {
+                "description": "The rule as written, without its reason",
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "to": {
+                "items": {
+                  "type": "string"
+                },
+                "type": "array"
+              }
+            },
+            "required": [
+              "line",
+              "text",
+              "form",
+              "from",
+              "to",
+              "because"
+            ],
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "unread": {
+          "description": "Lines read as no rule, as written",
+          "items": {
+            "additionalProperties": false,
+            "properties": {
+              "line": {
+                "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+                "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+                "type": "integer"
+              },
+              "text": {
+                "type": "string"
+              }
+            },
+            "required": [
+              "line",
+              "text"
+            ],
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "rules",
+        "unread",
+        "cutAt"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "The project's .shadowgit-rules as read; null without one"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / rulesFailure

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Why the project's rules couldn't be read",
+  "type": "string"
+}

Addedv2.3.0Oct 23, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the read-only annotations, the description discloses important behavioural traits: dynamic calls, reflection, string-built imports and test files are excluded; dependency counts are a floor; unsnapshotted edits are absent; the answer reports snapshot staleness; the ShadowGit app must be running; and rules are quoted as data rather than instructions.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The purpose is front-loaded, but the whole definition is one long, comma-spliced sentence that is difficult to parse. Most clauses add useful information, yet the structure would benefit substantially from being broken into separate, organised sentences.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With an output schema present, the description need not explain return values. It covers the key limitations, prerequisites, and staleness behaviour an agent needs to interpret results correctly; only sibling routing and potential scale/pagination concerns are absent.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds some meaning by explaining what passing `area` does (one area's files, most-depended-on symbols, inbound/outbound area dependencies), but does not elaborate on `repo` and largely restates the schema's area semantics.

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 a specific resource and scope: how a ShadowGit-tracked project is organised from ShadowGit's map, enumerating counts, layers, areas, calls/imports, processes and rules. It is clear what the tool returns, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings such as get_code_context or list_repos.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It implies usage by explaining that omitting `area` gives the whole project and supplying `area` gives one area's files and dependencies. It does not state when to prefer this tool over get_code_context or list_repos, nor any exclusions.

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

Deploy Server