github-ruleset-mcp

apply_ruleset

Apply a branch protection ruleset to a GitHub repository. Preview changes with dry run before applying.

Instructions

Apply a branch protection ruleset to a GitHub repository. Use dry_run=true (default) to preview changes.

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": {
      "owner": "<owner>",
      "repo": "<repo>"
    },
    "name": "apply_ruleset"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`repo`	Yes	Repository name
`owner`	Yes	Repository owner (user or org)
`dry_run`	No	Preview changes without applying (default: true)
`template`	No	Template name: standard, strict, relaxed, or controlled
`custom_ruleset`	No	Custom ruleset JSON (overrides template if provided)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 1, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the burden. It discloses the dry_run preview behavior and implies actual application when dry_run is false. However, it does not mention permissions, overwrite behavior, or error outcomes, which leaves potential side effects undisclosed.

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 concise sentences that immediately convey the action and the dry_run option. There is no wasted phrasing, though the second sentence could be integrated.

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 covers the core purpose and preview capability, but with no output schema or annotations, it omits details like response format, prerequisites, or whether the ruleset replaces existing ones. Adequate for a straightforward tool but not comprehensive.

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?

All parameter descriptions are already present in the input schema (100% coverage). The description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Apply a branch protection ruleset to a GitHub repository.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and given sibling tools (list_rulesets, delete_ruleset, check_protection), this tool uniquely performs the apply action.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description gives a usage hint about dry_run for previewing, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like check_protection or list_rulesets. Usage is implied from the verb 'apply' rather than explicitly contrasted with siblings.

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

Deploy Server