Skip to main content
Glama
gbatistuta0

AppFactory

by gbatistuta0
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

GitHub Issues Bootstrap

github_issues_bootstrap
DestructiveIdempotent

Create or refresh a GitHub repo's issue label set before issue creation, returning a dry-run command plan by default and requiring approval for live changes.

Instructions

Create or refresh the GitHub label set (ios, backend, store, lead, founder, next, later, other-project) on a repo (needs human approval unless dry_run).

Use when: before github_issue_create. dry_run=true (default) returns the commands. No-op (n/a) when the github_issues run option is off. Returns: {ok, commands/created, dry_run} or an approval_required refusal.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
repoYesGitHub repository as 'owner/name', e.g. 'octocat/my-app'.
app_dirNoApp directory; when given, the github_issues run option is read from its spec.
dry_runNoIf true (default) nothing is changed or sent and the exact plan/command is returned; false performs the live action.
approval_idNoApproval id from a previous approval_required refusal; omit on the first call. The human approves out-of-band with `appfactory approve <id>`, then call again with the same arguments and this id.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.1.5
    • addedInput schema / properties / app_dir / description
      Added value: +"App directory; when given, the github_issues run option is read from its spec."
    • addedInput schema / properties / approval_id / description
      Added value: +"Approval id from a previous approval_required refusal; omit on the first call. The human approves out-of-band with `appfactory approve <id>`, then call again with the same arguments and this id."
    • addedInput schema / properties / dry_run / description
      Added value: +"If true (default) nothing is changed or sent and the exact plan/command is returned; false performs the live action."
    • addedInput schema / properties / repo / description
      Added value: +"GitHub repository as 'owner/name', e.g. 'octocat/my-app'."
  2. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations cover idempotency, destructiveness and open-world scope, but the description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the human-approval gate, the approval_required refusal path, and that dry_run returns commands rather than executing. It doesn't explain the out-of-band approve flow (which lives in the param schema), so a 4 rather than 5.

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?

Front-loaded purpose sentence followed by tight 'Use when / dry_run / no-op / Returns' clauses. No filler; every line carries a distinct fact.

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-value details are covered elsewhere, yet the description still summarizes {ok, commands/created, dry_run} and the approval_required refusal. Combined with the approval and no-op guidance, an agent has what it needs to call this 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds that dry_run defaults to true and returns commands, and that a no-op occurs under certain run-option states, which gives meaning beyond the field-level docs.

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 (create/refresh) and resource (the GitHub label set), lists the exact labels, and names the sibling github_issue_create as the downstream consumer. An agent can distinguish this from github_issue_create without opening the schema.

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?

Explicit 'Use when: before github_issue_create', notes the dry_run default behavior, and states the no-op condition when the github_issues run option is off. This is textbook when/when-not/alternative guidance.

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