Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
github-resume-assistant

github-resume-assistant

by justomsharma
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

fetch_github_repos

Fetch a GitHub user's public profile and repositories to ground resume advice in real activity. Returns profile summary, stars, language, and dates for each repo.

Instructions

Fetch a GitHub user's public profile and repositories.

Use this to ground resume advice in someone's real GitHub activity: it returns their profile summary plus every public repo with stars, primary language, and creation / last-push dates. Handles users with no public repositories gracefully.

Args: username: The GitHub login to look up (e.g. "octocat").

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": {
      "username": "<username>"
    },
    "name": "fetch_github_repos"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
usernameYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Discloses return data (profile + repos, stars, language, dates) and edge case handling, despite no annotations.

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?

Two sentences plus Args section, no extraneous words, front-loaded purpose.

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

Completeness5/5

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

With output schema present, description adequately covers return values and edge cases; complete for a simple fetch tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema has 0% coverage, but description includes detailed param documentation with example ('octocat').

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Clear verb ('Fetch'), resource ('GitHub user's public profile and repositories'), and no sibling ambiguity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit use case ('ground resume advice') and graceful handling of empty repos, but no explicit when-not or alternatives (none needed).

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools