Skip to main content
Glama
fovi-llc

Radicle + GitHub MCP Server

by fovi-llc

rad_push

Push code changes to the Radicle peer-to-peer network for decentralized collaboration and version control.

Instructions

Push changes to the Radicle network.

Args:
    repository_path: Path to the repository (default: current directory)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
repository_pathNo.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • The primary handler function for the 'rad_push' tool. It is decorated with @mcp.tool() which registers it with the MCP server. Executes 'rad push' command in the given repository path using the run_rad_command helper, returning success or error message.
    @mcp.tool()
    async def rad_push(repository_path: str = ".") -> str:
        """
        Push changes to the Radicle network.
        
        Args:
            repository_path: Path to the repository (default: current directory)
        """
        result = await run_rad_command(["rad", "push"], cwd=repository_path)
        
        if result["success"]:
            return f"✅ Successfully pushed changes\n{result['stdout']}"
        else:
            return f"❌ Failed to push changes: {result['stderr']}"
  • Shared helper function used by rad_push (and other tools) to execute 'rad' CLI commands asynchronously, capturing stdout, stderr, return code, and handling errors.
    async def run_rad_command(command: List[str], cwd: Optional[str] = None) -> Dict[str, Any]:
        """
        Run a rad command and return the result.
        
        Args:
            command: List of command arguments starting with 'rad'
            cwd: Working directory to run the command in
            
        Returns:
            Dictionary with stdout, stderr, and return_code
        """
        try:
            # Ensure command starts with 'rad'
            if not command or command[0] != "rad":
                command = ["rad"] + command
                
            logger.info(f"Running command: {' '.join(command)}")
            
            process = await asyncio.create_subprocess_exec(
                *command,
                stdout=asyncio.subprocess.PIPE,
                stderr=asyncio.subprocess.PIPE,
                cwd=cwd
            )
            
            stdout, stderr = await process.communicate()
            
            return {
                "stdout": stdout.decode("utf-8").strip(),
                "stderr": stderr.decode("utf-8").strip(),
                "return_code": process.returncode,
                "success": process.returncode == 0
            }
            
        except FileNotFoundError:
            return {
                "stdout": "",
                "stderr": "rad command not found. Please ensure Radicle is installed.",
                "return_code": 127,
                "success": False
            }
        except Exception as e:
            return {
                "stdout": "",
                "stderr": f"Error running command: {str(e)}",
                "return_code": 1,
                "success": False
            }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('Push changes') which implies a write/mutation operation, but doesn't disclose any behavioral traits like authentication requirements, network effects, error conditions, or what constitutes 'changes'. For a network operation tool, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 appropriately sized with two sentences - one stating the purpose and one explaining the parameter. It's front-loaded with the core functionality. However, the second sentence could be more integrated rather than appearing as a separate 'Args:' section, and there's some wasted vertical space in the formatting.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given that there's an output schema (which means return values don't need explanation in the description), 1 parameter, and no annotations, the description is minimally adequate. It states what the tool does and documents the single parameter. However, for a network operation tool that presumably modifies remote state, more context about behavior and usage would be expected for completeness.

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 the parameter name and a brief explanation ('Path to the repository') beyond what the schema provides (which has 0% description coverage). However, with only 1 parameter total, the baseline would be 4 if no param info was provided. Since it does provide some param info but doesn't fully explain the implications of the path parameter or the default behavior, a 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the action ('Push changes') and target ('to the Radicle network'), which is a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like rad_sync or rad_clone, which might have overlapping functionality in a version control context.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like rad_sync or rad_clone. There's no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions. The only contextual hint is the parameter description mentioning 'default: current directory', but this doesn't constitute usage guidance.

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

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/fovi-llc/radicle-mcp'

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