Skip to main content
Glama
r28ai

GitHub + Linear Dev Workflows

by r28ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

github_secret_scanning_list_alerts

Read-onlyIdempotent

List secret scanning alerts for a repository to triage exposed credentials by pattern, provider, and validity, without returning the secret value.

Instructions

List secret scanning alerts: which pattern matched, which provider, and whether the credential is still valid. The detected secret itself is never returned by this tool — it is dropped from the response whatever the request asked for, because triage does not need it. Requires administrator access.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoThe page number of the results to fetch. Defaults to 1.
repoYesThe name of the repository without the `.git` extension. The name is not case sensitive.
sortNoThe property to sort the results by. `created` means when the alert was created; `updated` means when it was updated or resolved. GitHub uses `created` when this is absent.
ownerYesThe account owner of the repository. The name is not case sensitive.
stateNoSet to `open` or `resolved` to only list alerts in a specific state.
perPageNoThe number of results per page (max 100). Defaults to 30.
assigneeNoFilters alerts by assignee. Use `*` for all assigned alerts, `none` for unassigned, or a GitHub username.
validityNoA comma-separated list of validities — whether GitHub could confirm the secret still works. Can be: `active`, `inactive`, `unknown`.
directionNoThe direction to sort the results by. GitHub uses `desc` when this is absent.
hideSecretNoLeave the detected secret value out of the response. Set this when the result is going into a model's context: triage needs the type, the location and the state, not the credential.
resolutionNoA comma-separated list of resolutions. Valid resolutions are `false_positive`, `wont_fix`, `revoked`, `pattern_edited`, `pattern_deleted` or `used_in_tests`.
secretTypeNoA comma-separated list of secret types to return. All default secret patterns are returned when absent. Cannot be combined with `exclude_secret_types`.
isMultiRepoNoOnly alerts for secrets detected in more than one repository.
isPubliclyLeakedNoOnly alerts for secrets that were leaked publicly.
excludeSecretTypesNoA comma-separated list of secret types to exclude from the results. Cannot be combined with `secret_type`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld). The description adds material behavior the annotations cannot: the secret value is stripped from the response unconditionally, even if the request asks for it, plus the admin-access requirement. That is exactly the kind of non-obvious disclosure this dimension rewards.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with what is returned and what is deliberately withheld. No filler, no restatement of the tool name.

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?

With no output schema, the description does useful work describing the returned fields and the secret-redaction behavior, and flags the admin requirement. It omits pagination/state-filtering context, but those are adequately covered by the schema.

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% across all 15 parameters, so the schema already documents page, sort, validity, secretType, etc. The description only echoes a few of those concepts (validity, pattern/provider) without adding syntax or format detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List secret scanning alerts') and immediately names the payload contents (pattern, provider, validity), which unambiguously separates it from the dependabot and code-scanning alert siblings in the tool list.

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?

Gives a clear precondition ('Requires administrator access') and frames the intended use case as triage, which tells the agent when this tool is appropriate. It does not name an alternative tool or state when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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