reposniffer-mcp

find_repos

Search and rank GitHub repositories by feature description, providing quality metrics like stars, activity, license, and archived status to support adoption decisions.

Instructions

Rank open-source GitHub projects that implement a described feature.

Use when an agent needs to pick a library/project to adopt or study, and wants a verifiable, adoption-grade verdict with evidence and quality signals (stars, activity, license, archived status) instead of a hallucinated guess.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`query`	Yes
`top_k`	No
`intent`	No	adopt
`license`	No
`language`	No
`min_stars`	No
`include_archived`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed10 schema fields changedv0.1.4Sep 9, 2026

removedInput schema / $defs

Removed value: -{
-  "FindReposParams": {
-    "properties": {
-      "include_archived": {
-        "default": false,
-        "description": "Include archived repos (usually avoid).",
-        "title": "Include Archived",
-        "type": "boolean"
-      },
-      "intent": {
-        "default": "adopt",
-        "description": "adopt = pick a dependency to use; study = reference implementation to learn from.",
-        "title": "Intent",
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "language": {
-        "anyOf": [
-          {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          {
-            "type": "null"
-          }
-        ],
-        "default": null,
-        "description": "Optional language filter, e.g. 'python', 'rust'.",
-        "title": "Language"
-      },
-      "license": {
-        "anyOf": [
-          {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          {
-            "type": "null"
-          }
-        ],
-        "default": null,
-        "description": "Optional SPDX license key, e.g. 'mit', 'apache-2.0'.",
-        "title": "License"
-      },
-      "min_stars": {
-        "anyOf": [
-          {
-            "type": "integer"
-          },
-          {
-            "type": "null"
-          }
-        ],
-        "default": null,
-        "description": "Optional minimum stars filter.",
-        "title": "Min Stars"
-      },
-      "query": {
-        "description": "Plain-language description of the feature, pattern, or narrow library you want.",
-        "title": "Query",
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "top_k": {
-        "default": 5,
-        "description": "Number of ranked repos to return.",
-        "maximum": 20,
-        "minimum": 1,
-        "title": "Top K",
-        "type": "integer"
-      }
-    },
-    "required": [
-      "query"
-    ],
-    "title": "FindReposParams",
-    "type": "object"
-  }
-}

addedInput schema / properties / include_archived

Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "title": "Include Archived",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / intent

Added value: +{
+  "default": "adopt",
+  "title": "Intent",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / language

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Language"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / license

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "License"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / min_stars

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Min Stars"
+}

removedInput schema / properties / params

Removed value: -{
-  "$ref": "#/$defs/FindReposParams"
-}

addedInput schema / properties / query

Added value: +{
+  "title": "Query",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / top_k

Added value: +{
+  "default": 5,
+  "title": "Top K",
+  "type": "integer"
+}

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "params"
-]New value: +[
+  "query"
+]

First observedv0.1.1Sep 8, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the result is verifiable, adoption-grade, and includes quality signals such as stars, activity, license, and archived status, but it does not mention read-only behavior, error cases, or ranking mechanics.

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 two sentences long and focused. It front-loads the primary action and adds only relevant detail about the expected output and use case.

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 description gives a solid high-level purpose but is incomplete for a 7-parameter tool. It does not clarify parameter semantics, output schema details, or relationship to sibling tools, so an agent may need additional information to use it correctly in nuanced scenarios.

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?

The schema coverage is 0% and the description does not explicitly document the parameters. Parameter names like top_k, min_stars, license, language, and include_archived are self-explanatory to some degree, but intent is not explained and value formats are left ambiguous.

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: ranking open-source GitHub projects by a described feature. It distinguishes itself from a generic search by emphasizing an adoption-grade verdict with evidence and quality signals.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description explicitly says when to use it: when an agent needs to pick a library/project to adopt or study. It could mention when not to use it or how it differs from sibling tools like repo_intel and health, but the primary use case is clear.

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

Deploy Server