Skip to main content
Glama

Server Configuration

Describes the environment variables required to run the server.

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
GITHUB_TOKENNoGitHub token for NLP repo resolution to avoid GitHub API rate limits
CODEWIKI_BASE_URLNoBase URL for the codewiki servicehttps://codewiki.google
CODEWIKI_MAX_RETRIESNoMaximum number of retries for failed requests3
CODEWIKI_RETRY_DELAYNoBase retry delay in milliseconds250
CODEWIKI_REQUEST_TIMEOUTNoRequest timeout in milliseconds30000

Instructions

Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.

This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.

Capabilities

Features and capabilities supported by this server

Protocol revision2025-11-25

CapabilityDetails
tools
{
  "listChanged": true
}

Tools

Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions

NameDescription
codewiki_search_reposC

Search repositories indexed by codewiki.google

codewiki_fetch_repoC

Fetch generated wiki content for a repository from codewiki.google

codewiki_ask_repoC

Ask a natural-language question about a repository indexed in codewiki.google

Prompts

Interactive templates invoked by user choice

NameDescription

No prompts

Resources

Contextual data attached and managed by the client

NameDescription

No resources

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Scored across 3 tools

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose with no overlap: 'ask_repo' handles natural-language queries, 'fetch_repo' retrieves wiki content, and 'search_repos' finds indexed repositories. The descriptions make it easy to differentiate between querying, fetching, and searching functions.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a perfect 'codewiki_verb_noun' pattern with consistent snake_case formatting. The prefix 'codewiki_' is uniformly applied, and verbs ('ask', 'fetch', 'search') are distinct and appropriately paired with nouns ('repo' or 'repos').

Tool Count3/5

With only 3 tools, the set feels thin for a server focused on repository wiki interactions. While the tools cover basic operations, the scope might benefit from additional tools for updates, deletions, or more granular queries to handle common workflows more comprehensively.

Completeness4/5

The tools provide good coverage for core operations: searching repositories, fetching content, and asking questions. However, there are minor gaps such as lacking update or deletion tools for wiki content, which could limit agent capabilities in full lifecycle management scenarios.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues