CNB Remote MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

List build history

build_list

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a repository's CI build history and filter results by commit, branch, event, status, or date to inspect past pipeline runs.

Instructions

List CI build history of a repository with filters.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "repo": "<repo>"
    },
    "name": "build_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`sha`	No	Filter by commit
`page`	No	Page number, starting at 1
`repo`	Yes	Repository path, e.g. "owner/repo" or "group/subgroup/repo"
`event`	No	Filter by event, e.g. push, pull_request
`status`	No	Filter by status
`end_time`	No	End date "YYYY-MM-DD"
`page_size`	No	Items per page (max 100)
`source_ref`	No	Filter by source branch
`target_ref`	No	Filter by target branch
`create_time`	No	Start date "YYYY-MM-DD"

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.0Nov 5, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds essentially nothing beyond that: it does not disclose ordering (newest first?), default page size, whether the list is capped, or how pagination terminates -- all meaningful for a 10-param history listing.

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 well-formed sentence with the resource front-loaded and no filler. Its brevity is efficient, but it is bordering on under-specification rather than tightness.

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?

For a tool with 10 parameters, no output schema, and open-world paginated access, the description omits result shape, ordering, and pagination behavior. An agent can call it from the schema alone, but it cannot predict what comes back or how to page through results.

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 coverage is 100%, with every parameter documented including examples, date formats, and max page size, so the schema carries the semantic load. The description merely says 'with filters' without adding intent such as how sha/event/status combine or whether filters are ANDed. Baseline 3 applies.

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 ('List') and resource ('CI build history of a repository') with a scope qualifier ('with filters'). It is clearly distinct from nearby siblings like build_status or build_stage_logs, though it never names those alternatives to reinforce the distinction.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention of build_status as the tool to pick for a single build's status. 'With filters' hints at a filtered-list use case but gives the agent no routing rule against the 26 sibling tools.

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