phabricator-mcp

phabricator_commit_search

Read-only

Search Diffusion commits by text, author, project, repository, audit status, or hash; paginate results and include related projects or subscribers when needed.

Instructions

Search Diffusion commits

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": "phabricator_commit_search"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`after`	No	Cursor for next-page pagination
`limit`	No	Maximum results (max 100)
`order`	No	Result order
`before`	No	Cursor for previous-page pagination
`queryKey`	No	Built-in query: "all", "active", "authored", "audited"
`attachments`	No	Data attachments
`constraints`	No	Search constraints

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.19May 29, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds no behavioral context such as pagination behavior, attachment effects, or result limits, which would help an agent invoke it correctly.

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 wasted words. It is compact and direct, though extremely terse for a tool with this many parameters.

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?

The input schema is rich and fully documented, and read-only annotations cover safety. However, with no output schema and no description of return format or pagination behavior, the definition is only minimally complete for a search tool with nested constraints.

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%, so the schema fully documents all seven parameters including nested constraint fields. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, which is the baseline 3 case.

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 and resource: "Search Diffusion commits." It is clear what domain the tool operates in, but it does not distinguish itself from sibling search tools such as revision_search or repository_code_search.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The agent must infer appropriate usage from the name and shared search-tool conventions.

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

Deploy Server