Skip to main content
Glama
aflsolutions

ShadowGit MCP Server

by aflsolutions
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

List ShadowGit projects

list_repos
Read-only

Lists ShadowGit projects being snapshotted, showing name, path, last snapshot time, active session, and the current working project so you can identify unknown projects and set default context.

Instructions

List the projects ShadowGit is snapshotting: name, path, time of the last snapshot, any active session, and which one matches the project you are working in. Other ShadowGit tools default to that current project. Use this when the user names a project you don't recognise.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
reposYes
currentYes
app_runningYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.1.1
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "app_running": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "current": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "repos": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "properties": {
+          "current": {
+            "type": "boolean"
+          },
+          "error": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "last_snapshot": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "name": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "path": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "session": {
+            "anyOf": [
+              {
+                "additionalProperties": false,
+                "properties": {
+                  "description": {
+                    "type": "string"
+                  },
+                  "id": {
+                    "type": "string"
+                  },
+                  "started_at": {
+                    "type": "string"
+                  }
+                },
+                "required": [
+                  "id",
+                  "description",
+                  "started_at"
+                ],
+                "type": "object"
+              },
+              {
+                "type": "null"
+              }
+            ]
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "name",
+          "path",
+          "current",
+          "last_snapshot",
+          "error",
+          "session"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "current",
+    "app_running",
+    "repos"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavior: that it surfaces the project matching the current working directory and that other tools default to it — a non-obvious cross-tool invariant the annotations cannot express.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the resource and its fields, then the usage condition. Every clause carries information and nothing is padded.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained; the description nonetheless covers purpose, trigger, and the default-project behavior that governs the other tools. Adequate for a zero-arg listing tool; ordering or filtering behavior is not addressed, but it is not needed to invoke it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does add value by describing what the (output-schema-backed) result conveys, notably the 'which one matches the project you are working in' signal, which is semantic rather than a restatement of the schema.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ('List the projects ShadowGit is snapshotting') and enumerates the returned fields, so the agent knows exactly what it gets. It is clearly distinct from the session/git siblings and reads nothing like them.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives an explicit trigger ('Use this when the user names a project you don't recognise') and explains the selection model other tools assume ('Other ShadowGit tools default to that current project'). That is when-to-use plus cross-tool context, nothing left to inference.

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