Skip to main content
Glama

github_secrets_list

List GitHub Actions secrets for a repository to manage CI/CD workflows and secure environment variables.

Instructions

List GitHub Actions secrets for a repository

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function for the 'github_secrets_list' tool. It runs 'gh secret list' with an optional repository flag, formats the output into a markdown-like text response, handles cases with no secrets or errors, and returns a structured content object.
    export async function githubSecretsList({ repo }) {
      const repoFlag = repo ? `-R ${repo}` : "";
      const repoSecrets = await commandRunner(`gh secret list ${repoFlag}`);
    
      let output = "REPOSITORY SECRETS\n==================\n";
    
      if (repoSecrets.success && repoSecrets.stdout) {
        output += repoSecrets.stdout + "\n";
      } else if (repoSecrets.success) {
        output += "No repository secrets configured.\n";
      } else {
        output += `Error: ${repoSecrets.stderr || repoSecrets.error}\n`;
        output += "\nMake sure you're authenticated: gh auth login\n";
      }
    
      return { content: [{ type: "text", text: output }] };
    }
  • src/tools.js:576-598 (registration)
    The registration of all tools, including 'githubSecretsList', in the exported 'tools' object used for MCP tool registration.
    export const tools = {
      // Git
      gitStatusExplained,
      gitBranchExplained,
      gitCommitGuided,
      // Docker
      dockerCheckSetup,
      dockerAnalyzeProject,
      dockerBuild,
      // GitHub
      githubSecretsList,
      githubSecretsSet,
      // Azure
      azureCheckCli,
      azureAcrSetup,
      azureContainerAppsDeploy,
      // SonarCloud
      sonarcloudSetupGuide,
      sonarcloudCreateConfig,
      // Onboarding
      devOnboardingCheck,
    };
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 implies a read-only operation ('List'), which suggests non-destructive behavior, but doesn't specify authentication requirements, rate limits, or output format. The description adds minimal value beyond the implied action, meeting the baseline for no annotations but lacking depth.

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 a single, clear sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it highly efficient and easy to parse. Every word earns its place, achieving optimal conciseness.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is adequate but minimal. It states what the tool does but lacks context about authentication, scope (e.g., organization vs. repository secrets), or output details. For a basic list operation, this is the minimum viable, but more completeness would enhance usability.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description doesn't add parameter details, which is appropriate. A baseline of 4 is applied for zero parameters, as the schema fully covers the absence of inputs.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('GitHub Actions secrets for a repository'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'github_secrets_delete' or 'github_secrets_set', but the action is distinct enough to imply separation. A 5 would require explicit sibling differentiation.

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, such as 'github_secrets_guide' or 'github_secrets_set'. It lacks context about prerequisites, timing, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage based solely on the tool name and purpose.

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/rideRTD/RTD-DevOps'

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