Skip to main content
Glama
jolfr

Commit Helper MCP

by jolfr

refresh_configuration

Reload and update Commitizen settings to ensure commit message tools function with current configurations.

Instructions

Refresh the Commitizen configuration and reinitialize the service.

Returns: Dict containing refresh status and new configuration info

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • The core handler function for the 'refresh_configuration' tool, decorated with @mcp.tool(). It refreshes the Commitizen service configuration and returns updated status information.
    @mcp.tool()
    @handle_errors(log_errors=True)
    def refresh_configuration() -> Dict[str, Any]:
        """
        Refresh the Commitizen configuration and reinitialize the service.
    
        Returns:
            Dict containing refresh status and new configuration info
        """
        try:
            service.refresh_config()
        except Exception as e:
            raise ConfigurationError(
                "Failed to refresh configuration", config_file="commitizen config", cause=e
            )
    
        info = service.get_info()
    
        result = {
            "status": "refreshed",
            "new_config": info,
            "timestamp": str(__import__("datetime").datetime.now()),
        }
    
        return create_success_response(result)
  • Import statement in the main MCP server module that brings in the refresh_configuration tool from workflow_tools, ensuring it is registered and available via the MCP server.
    from .server.workflow_tools import (
        get_commit_questions,
        health_check,
        refresh_configuration,
        commit_workflow_step,
    )
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'reinitialize the service,' hinting at a mutation/restart action, but doesn't disclose critical behavioral traits like whether this is safe, idempotent, requires specific permissions, or has side effects (e.g., downtime). For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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?

The description is appropriately sized and front-loaded, with the core purpose in the first sentence and return details in the second. However, the second sentence could be omitted since an output schema exists, slightly reducing efficiency.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool has 0 parameters, 100% schema coverage, and an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, for a mutation tool ('Refresh' implies change) with no annotations, it should do more to explain behavioral context (e.g., side effects, safety), making it incomplete for confident agent use.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so no parameter information is needed. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, as the description doesn't need to compensate for any gaps.

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 action ('Refresh') and target ('Commitizen configuration'), and mentions reinitializing the service, which provides a specific verb+resource. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this tool from its many siblings (like health_check or get_git_implementation_info), which would require a 5.

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. The description lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., when configuration might be stale) or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the purpose alone.

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/jolfr/commit-helper-mcp'

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