Gitea MCP Server

create_branch

Creates a new branch in a Gitea repository from a specified source branch, enabling isolated development or testing without altering the main codebase.

Instructions

Creates a new branch in a Gitea repository from a source branch.

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": {
      "owner": "<owner>",
      "repo": "<repo>",
      "new_branch_name": "<new_branch_name>"
    },
    "name": "create_branch"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`repo`	Yes
`owner`	Yes
`source_branch`	No	main
`new_branch_name`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 28, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

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 behavioral burden. It discloses only that a branch is created, omitting permissions, branch-exists behavior, source-branch defaulting, and error handling.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the action and resource stated immediately. There is no filler or repetition.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and 0% parameter documentation, the description omits auth needs, branch-exists behavior, and parameter roles. The output schema covers return values, but the call context remains incomplete.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% for four parameters. The description vaguely references a source branch and repository but does not name or explain owner, repo, new_branch_name, or the default 'main' source branch.

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 ('Creates') and resource ('new branch') in a Gitea repository, adding 'from a source branch' to clarify the operation. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings, but branch creation is distinct from issue, PR, and file tools.

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?

Provides no when-to-use guidance, no alternatives, and no prerequisites. Creation is implied by the verb, but all usage conditions are left to inference.

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

Deploy Server