Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
GitFerry

GitFerry

by mayank1307
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Pack local Git changes

pack_changes
Destructive

Packs local Git commits, staged/unstaged edits, and untracked files into a portable .gitferry bundle for transfer and apply without a shared remote or network.

Instructions

Read a local Git repository and write a portable .gitferry bundle of commits, staged/unstaged changes, and untracked files. only=repo instead captures tracked files as a snapshot. Review untracked files for secrets before sharing. No network transfer is performed.

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": {
      "cwd": "<cwd>"
    },
    "name": "pack_changes"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cwdYesAbsolute path to the git repository (or any directory inside it)
baseNoRef/sha the bundle applies onto (default: merge-base with the upstream tracking branch)
onlyNoSelect all, uncommitted, staged, unstaged, committed, or repo (tracked-file snapshot). Default all. Include flags can further narrow the selection; repo is exclusive.
outputNoOutput bundle path; defaults to <repo>-<branch>-<sha>.gitferry in cwd
portableNoWrite a plain ZIP for git + unzip targets instead of the smaller Brotli-wrapped format (default false)
includeStagedNoInclude staged (index) changes (default true)
includeCommitsNoInclude unpushed commits (default true)
includeUnstagedNoInclude unstaged working-tree changes (default true)
includeWorktreeNoInclude staged AND unstaged changes; master switch over includeStaged/includeUnstaged (default true)
includeUntrackedNoInclude untracked files (default true)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.2

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=false, and the description reinforces this with 'No network transfer is performed' plus a data-exposure warning to review untracked files for secrets. It stops short of saying whether an existing output bundle is overwritten or what happens on partial failure, which matters given destructiveHint=true.

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?

Four tight sentences that front-load the core action and bundle contents, with the caveat and the no-network guarantee appended. Nothing is redundant, though the only=repo sentence interrupts the flow between the main action and the security warning.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Covers the essentials for a ten-parameter, non-idempotent write operation with no output schema: what gets packed, output format portability, and the no-network constraint. It leaves open whether the output path can be overwritten and what the tool returns on success, small but real gaps.

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 coverage is 100%, so all ten parameters including the exclude/include switches are already documented. The description only restates the semantic difference of one enum value (only=repo as a tracked-file snapshot), adding minimal meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource: reads a local Git repo and writes a portable .gitferry bundle containing commits, staged/unstaged changes, and untracked files. The write-bundle framing implicitly distinguishes it from the read/apply siblings, but no sibling is named explicitly.

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 only routing guidance is intra-tool: 'only=repo instead captures tracked files as a snapshot.' There is no statement about when to use pack_changes versus inspect_bundle or apply_bundle, so alternative selection is left to inference from the names.

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