Skip to main content
Glama

get_github_trending_developers

Retrieve trending GitHub developers filtered by programming language, spoken language, and time period using a straightforward API for actionable developer insights.

Instructions

Get trending developers on github

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
languageNoLanguage to filter repositories by
sinceNoTime period to filter repositories by
spoken_languageNoSpoken language to filter repositories by

Implementation Reference

  • The specific case handler within the call_tool function that implements the logic for the 'get_github_trending_developers' tool. It parses arguments, fetches trending developers using the external fetch_developers function, formats the data into a structured JSON, and returns it as TextContent.
    case ToolName.GET_DEVELOPERS.value:
        # Get parameters from arguments
        language = arguments.get("language")
        since = arguments.get("since", "daily")
        
        # Fetch trending developers
        developers = fetch_developers(
            language=language,
            since=since
        )
        
        # Format the response
        formatted_devs = []
        for dev in developers:
            formatted_dev = {
                "username": dev["username"],
                "name": dev["name"],
                "url": dev["url"],
                "avatar": dev["avatar"],
                "repo": {
                    "name": dev["repo"]["name"],
                    "description": dev["repo"]["description"],
                    "url": dev["repo"]["url"]
                }
            }
            formatted_devs.append(formatted_dev)
        
        return [
            TextContent(type="text", text=json.dumps(formatted_devs, indent=2))
        ]
  • Registration of the 'get_github_trending_developers' tool in the list_tools() function via the Tool object, including its name, description, and input schema.
        Tool(
            name=ToolName.GET_DEVELOPERS.value,
            description="Get trending developers on github",
            inputSchema={
                "type": "object",
                "properties": {
                    "language": {
                        "type": "string",
                        "description": "Language to filter repositories by",
                    },
                    "since": {
                        "type": "string",
                        "description": "Time period to filter repositories by",
                        "enum": ["daily", "weekly", "monthly"],
                    },
                    "spoken_language": {
                        "type": "string",
                        "description": "Spoken language to filter repositories by",
                    },
                },
            },
        ),
    ]
  • Input schema definition for the 'get_github_trending_developers' tool, specifying parameters for language, since period, and spoken language.
    inputSchema={
        "type": "object",
        "properties": {
            "language": {
                "type": "string",
                "description": "Language to filter repositories by",
            },
            "since": {
                "type": "string",
                "description": "Time period to filter repositories by",
                "enum": ["daily", "weekly", "monthly"],
            },
            "spoken_language": {
                "type": "string",
                "description": "Spoken language to filter repositories by",
            },
        },
    },
  • Enum definition providing the string name for the 'get_github_trending_developers' tool.
    class ToolName(Enum):
        GET_REPOSITORIES = "get_github_trending_repositories"
        GET_DEVELOPERS = "get_github_trending_developers"
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the action without disclosing behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication needs, or output format. It's a read operation implied by 'Get', but details on pagination, error handling, or data freshness are missing.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with zero waste, front-loading the core purpose. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool, making it easy to parse quickly.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address behavioral aspects or return values, leaving gaps in understanding how the tool behaves and what results to expect, which is inadequate for a tool with parameters and no structured output info.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying filtering for 'trending developers', which aligns with the schema but doesn't enhance understanding. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Get trending developers on github' clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('trending developers'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from the sibling tool 'get_github_trending_repositories' beyond the resource type, which is a minor gap in specificity.

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, such as the sibling tool for trending repositories. It lacks any context about scenarios where developers vs. repositories are relevant, leaving usage decisions to inference.

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

Related 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/hetaoBackend/mcp-github-trending'

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