Skip to main content
Glama
muhammadzaeemaltaf

GitHub Summary MCP

list_repositories

Retrieve all GitHub repositories accessible to the authenticated user, including owned, collaborative, and organizational repositories for activity analysis.

Instructions

Return all repositories accessible by the authenticated GitHub user.

Includes repositories where the user is an owner, collaborator, or organisation member.

Returns: A dict with key "repositories" containing a list of objects, each with full_name, name, owner, private, and default_branch fields.

Example return value::

{
    "repositories": [
        {
            "full_name": "octocat/Hello-World",
            "name": "Hello-World",
            "owner": "octocat",
            "private": false,
            "default_branch": "main"
        }
    ]
}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does specify that it returns repositories 'accessible by the authenticated GitHub user' and details what access levels are included (owner, collaborator, organization member), which adds useful context. However, it doesn't mention authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination behavior, or error conditions, leaving significant behavioral aspects undocumented.

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?

The description is well-structured and appropriately sized. It starts with the core purpose, adds clarifying details about access levels, then provides a clear return format with an example. Every sentence adds value without redundancy. The example is separated for readability but remains concise.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no annotations, but with an output schema), the description is reasonably complete. It explains what the tool does, who it affects, and what it returns. The output schema handles return value documentation, so the description doesn't need to duplicate that. However, it could benefit from more behavioral context like authentication or rate limits.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool has 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% (though empty). The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters since none exist. It focuses instead on the return value structure, which is helpful given the presence of an output schema. A baseline of 4 is appropriate for zero-parameter tools.

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's purpose: 'Return all repositories accessible by the authenticated GitHub user.' It specifies the verb ('return') and resource ('repositories'), and clarifies scope ('accessible by the authenticated GitHub user'). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_daily_summary' or 'get_repo_commits_today', which have different purposes.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention sibling tools or explain scenarios where this tool is appropriate versus others. The only contextual information is about what repositories are included, which relates to purpose rather than usage guidelines.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/muhammadzaeemaltaf/github-summary-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server