Skip to main content
Glama
jlromano

Bitbucket MCP Server

by jlromano

get_commit

Retrieve detailed information about a specific commit in a Bitbucket repository using workspace, repository, and commit hash identifiers.

Instructions

Get details of a specific commit

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
workspaceYesThe workspace slug
repo_slugYesThe repository slug
commit_hashYesThe commit hash

Implementation Reference

  • The actual implementation of the getCommit method that calls the Bitbucket API.
    async getCommit(workspace: string, repoSlug: string, commitHash: string): Promise<Commit> {
      const response = await this.api.get(`/repositories/${workspace}/${repoSlug}/commit/${commitHash}`);
      return response.data;
    }
  • src/index.ts:295-316 (registration)
    The tool definition for 'get_commit' registered in the MCP tool list.
    {
      name: 'get_commit',
      description: 'Get details of a specific commit',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          workspace: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'The workspace slug',
          },
          repo_slug: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'The repository slug',
          },
          commit_hash: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'The commit hash',
          },
        },
        required: ['workspace', 'repo_slug', 'commit_hash'],
      },
    },
  • The handler case in the MCP request processor that calls the BitbucketClient's getCommit method.
    case 'get_commit': {
      const { workspace, repo_slug, commit_hash } = args as {
        workspace: string;
        repo_slug: string;
        commit_hash: string;
      };
      const commit = await client.getCommit(workspace, repo_slug, commit_hash);
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: 'text',
            text: JSON.stringify(commit, null, 2),
          },
        ],
      };
    }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states 'Get details' but doesn't clarify what details are returned (e.g., JSON structure, error handling), whether it's read-only (implied but not explicit), or any rate limits/permissions required. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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, direct sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action ('Get details') and efficiently specifies the target ('of a specific commit'). No unnecessary elaboration or redundancy is present.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool with three required parameters. It doesn't explain what 'details' entail (e.g., commit message, changes, timestamps), error scenarios, or return format, leaving the agent with insufficient context to use the tool effectively beyond basic parameter passing.

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%, with all three parameters clearly documented in the schema (workspace slug, repository slug, commit hash). The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying these are needed to identify a commit, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage without compensating further.

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 clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('details of a specific commit'), making the purpose understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'list_commits' by specifying retrieval of a single commit rather than listing multiple. However, it lacks specificity about what details are included (e.g., metadata, diff, author info).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a valid commit hash), contrast with 'list_commits' for browsing commits, or specify use cases like reviewing changes or checking commit status. The description alone offers no usage context.

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

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/jlromano/bitbucket-mcp'

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