Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Git MCP Server

Git MCP Server

by yumeminami
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_platform_config

Retrieve configuration settings for a given platform, enabling automated issue-to-code processes.

Instructions

Get configuration information for a specific platform

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": {
      "platform": "<platform>"
    },
    "name": "get_platform_config"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
platformYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.5

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. The name 'get' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explicitly state it is non-destructive or idempotent. Given the context of sibling tools (create/update/delete), it is clear, but not explicitly stated.

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?

A single sentence containing all necessary elements: verb, resource, scope. It is concise and front-loaded, with no wasted words.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one required param, output schema exists), the description is adequate but minimal. It lacks parameter guidance and does not mention that the output schema provides full details. Could be more helpful by referencing 'list_platforms' for platform values.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The single parameter 'platform' has no description in the schema (0% coverage). The tool description does not add meaning, such as what values to use (e.g., platform ID from list_platforms). This leaves the agent without guidance on how to populate the parameter.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the verb 'Get' and resource 'configuration information' for a specific platform. It distinguishes from sibling tool 'list_platforms' which lists all platforms, but does not elaborate on what the configuration includes.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or alternatives are provided. The usage is implied for retrieving config for a specific platform, but no guidance on prerequisites (e.g., platform must exist) or when to use this vs 'test_platform_connection'.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools