React Development Workflow MCP Server

create_feature_branch

Automatically create a feature or fix git branch from task ID and name, streamlining React development workflow.

Instructions

Create a git branch (feat/ or fix/) based on task details

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": {
      "taskName": "<taskName>",
      "taskId": "<taskId>",
      "type": "<type>"
    },
    "name": "create_feature_branch"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`type`	Yes	Branch type: feature or fix
`taskId`	Yes	Task ID
`taskName`	Yes	Task name/title

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 6, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but only states 'Create a git branch'. It omits side effects such as whether it checks out the branch, pushes to remote, or fails if the branch already exists.

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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource, with no filler or redundant information.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Despite the three documented parameters, the description lacks operational context such as the exact branch naming format, whether the branch is pushed, and error handling, making it incomplete for reliable invocation.

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% with clear descriptions for type, taskId, and taskName. The description adds minimal value beyond implying the branch prefix maps to the type parameter, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb 'Create' with resource 'git branch', specifies branch prefixes 'feat/ or fix/', and references task details, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_pull_request.

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?

No when-to-use or alternative guidance is provided. It does not state prerequisites, when to prefer create_pull_request, or conditions for not using this tool.

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

Deploy Server