Create a pull request in a GitHub repository by specifying title, body, head branch, base branch, and optional draft status.
Creates a new pull request.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| repo_owner | Yes | ||
| repo_name | Yes | ||
| title | Yes | ||
| body | Yes | ||
| head | Yes | ||
| base | Yes | ||
| draft | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Description only says 'creates' with no additional behavioral traits such as side effects, permissions, or response format; annotations provide some minimal hints but description adds no value beyond them.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence is concise but lacks structure and does not front-load key details; it is minimal but not robust.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Description fails to explain return values, parameter usage, or prerequisites; given 7 parameters and a complex context, it is incomplete for correct invocation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
No parameter descriptions in the description or schema (schema coverage is 0%), leaving the agent uninformed about what each parameter means or expects.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Clearly states it creates a pull request, but does not distinguish from other PR-related sibling tools like merge_pr or update_pr_description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives; lacks context for selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/saidsef/mcp-github-pr-issue-analyser'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server