Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
citio

citio

by lawrencehui
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

create_pr

Push a branch to a GitHub repository and create a pull request with a specified title, body, and base branch.

Instructions

Push branch and create a GitHub pull request

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": {
      "repo": "<repo>",
      "title": "<title>",
      "body": "<body>",
      "branch": "<branch>"
    },
    "name": "create_pr"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
baseNoBase branch to merge into (defaults to main)main
bodyYesPull request description in Markdown
repoYesRepository directory name under the workspace root
titleYesPull request title
branchYesHead branch to push and open the PR from

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries the burden. It discloses two actions (push and create PR), but lacks details on side effects, permissions needed, or error conditions.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the core action. It is concise, though slightly under-specified for a multi-action tool.

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?

No output schema, and the description is minimal. For a tool with 5 parameters and two actions, more context (e.g., return format, expected behavior) would help the agent.

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%, so baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond the schema's own descriptions.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Push branch and create a GitHub pull request'. This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from siblings like create_branch or investigate_codebase.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Does not mention prerequisites (e.g., branch must exist locally) or scenarios where this is preferred over other tools.

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