Skip to main content
Glama
yjiace

AlibabaCloud DevOps MCP Server

by yjiace

compare

Compare code changes between commits, branches, or tags in Alibaba Cloud DevOps repositories to review differences and track modifications.

Instructions

[Code Management] Query code to compare content

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
organizationIdYesOrganization ID, can be found in the basic information page of the organization admin console
repositoryIdYesRepository ID or a combination of organization ID and repository name, for example: 2835387 or organizationId%2Frepo-name (Note: slashes need to be URL encoded as %2F)
fromYesCan be CommitSHA, branch name or tag name
toYesCan be CommitSHA, branch name or tag name
sourceTypeNoOptions: branch, tag; if it's a commit comparison, you can omit this; if it's a branch comparison, you need to provide: branch, or you can omit it but ensure there are no branch or tag name conflicts; if it's a tag comparison, you need to provide: tag; if there are branches and tags with the same name, you need to strictly provide branch or tag
targetTypeNoOptions: branch, tag; if it's a commit comparison, you can omit this; if it's a branch comparison, you need to provide: branch, or you can omit it but ensure there are no branch or tag name conflicts; if it's a tag comparison, you need to provide: tag; if there are branches and tags with the same name, you need to strictly provide branch or tag
straightNoWhether to use Merge-Base: straight=false means using Merge-Base; straight=true means not using Merge-Base; default is false, meaning using Merge-Base
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. 'Query' suggests a read-only operation, but it doesn't confirm this or describe what the comparison output looks like (diffs, statistics, etc.), error conditions, or performance characteristics. The description lacks essential context about what 'compare' actually returns.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise at just 6 words, which is appropriate for a tool with comprehensive schema documentation. However, it could be more front-loaded with specific information about what's being compared. There's no wasted text, but it borders on under-specification.

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?

For a 7-parameter comparison tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what the comparison returns (diffs, change lists, statistics), doesn't mention typical use cases, and provides no context about the comparison algorithm or limitations. The schema handles parameter documentation well, but the description fails to provide necessary operational context.

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 description coverage is 100%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema itself. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the generic 'query code to compare content' phrase. It doesn't explain relationships between parameters (e.g., how 'from' and 'to' interact with 'sourceType' and 'targetType') or provide usage examples.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states 'Query code to compare content' which indicates a comparison operation but is vague about what specifically is being compared. It mentions 'code' and 'content' but doesn't specify if this compares commits, branches, files, or other code artifacts. While it distinguishes from many siblings (most are CRUD operations), it lacks the specificity needed for a 4 or 5.

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. There's no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or comparison with similar tools like 'get_commit' or 'list_commits' that might provide related functionality. The agent must infer usage from parameter names alone.

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/yjiace/alibabacloud-devops-mcp-server'

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