Skip to main content
Glama
louiscklaw

mcp-github-advanced-search

by louiscklaw
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_remaining_result

Retrieve remaining GitHub code search results by continuing from a start pointer, following the included instructions to collect all repository and file data.

Instructions

GET_REMAINING_RESULT

INTRODUCTION

This is a tools to get the remaining data searched by gas_search_code. the result is in json format with below fields.

[
    {
        "REPOSITORY_LINK": "<repository-found>",
        "FILE_LINK": "<file-found>",
        "RAW_USER_CONTENT_LINK": "<download-link-to-the-file>",
        "FILE_CONTENT": "<downloaded-content>"
    },
    {...},
    {...},
    {...},
    {"next_instructions_md": "<contains-the-instruction-to-get-the-remaining-result>"}
]

When you receive this, please ensure you follow the next_instructions_md to collect all results.

You can also use memory, sequential-thinking, structured-argumentation to help solving problems.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
start_idNostart pointer for return the remaining result default('0')0

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.6.2

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden and does a good job by specifying the exact JSON result shape, the fields returned, and the role of next_instructions_md in chaining further calls. It does not mention failure modes or rate limits, but for a read-style continuation tool this is sufficient.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The JSON example is useful and the structure is readable, but the description includes minor fluff and a typo ('This is a tools'), and the closing sentence about memory/sequential-thinking is not directly relevant to tool invocation. It is adequate but not tightly edited.

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?

The output format is described in detail, compensating for the missing output schema and making return values predictable. However, the description leaves the pagination termination condition and the relationship between start_id and next_instructions_md implicit, so an agent may not know exactly when to stop or what value to pass.

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?

The schema already documents start_id as a 'start pointer' with a default of 0 and has 100% description coverage, so the description does not need to restate it. The description adds context about remaining data and next_instructions_md but not concrete guidance on how to derive or increment start_id.

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 tool gets 'remaining data' from a prior gas_search_code search, naming the source tool and implying a continuation role. It does not explicitly contrast sibling tools, but 'remaining data searched by' is specific enough to distinguish it from the initial search tool.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies the tool should be used after gas_search_code to collect remaining results, and instructs the agent to follow next_instructions_md. However, it never gives an explicit when-to-use versus when-not-to-use rule nor names an alternative tool, leaving the pagination workflow 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

Other Tools