mcp-github-issues
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| GITHUB_TOKEN | Yes | GitHub personal access token with appropriate scopes (e.g., public_repo or repo) |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| list_issuesA | List issues in a GitHub repository. Use when the user wants to see open, closed, or all issues in a repo. Returns issue number, state, title, and author for each. Pull requests are filtered out so the result is true issues only. |
| create_issueA | Create a new issue in a GitHub repository. Use when the user wants to file a bug, request a feature, or track a task. Requires repo write permission on the authenticated user's token. The created issue is attributed to that user in the GitHub audit log. |
| add_commentA | Add a comment to an existing GitHub issue. Use when the user wants to reply to an issue thread. The comment is attributed to the authenticated user in the GitHub audit log. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 3 tools
Each tool serves a clear, distinct purpose: listing issues, creating issues, and adding comments. No overlap exists between them.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case: list_issues, create_issue, add_comment.
With only 3 tools, the server is minimal but appropriate for its narrow focus on issues; it could be expanded but is not unreasonable.
The surface lacks essential operations like updating, closing, or deleting issues, and does not support retrieving individual issue details. This creates significant gaps for typical issue management workflows.