Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
GitFlic MCP Server

GitFlic MCP Server

by zhimbura
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

gitflic_branch_list

Read-only

List and filter branches in a GitFlic project by name, merged status, and sort order to inspect repository branch structure.

Instructions

List branches in a project.

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": {
      "project": "<project>"
    },
    "name": "gitflic_branch_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
rawNoReturn the full, un-slimmed GitFlic response for THIS call (no token compression). Use when the default slim view dropped a field you need.
nameNoGlob/substring filter on branch name (e.g. 'release/*').
sortNoSort field; prefix '-' for descending.
limitNoReturn at most N.
fieldsNoReturn only these top-level fields (plus id keys), narrowing the response further.
mergedNotrue = only merged branches, false = only unmerged.
projectYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.5.1

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond the purpose line — no mention of the slimmed default response, the raw escape hatch, whether results are paginated, or how merged/unmerged filtering behaves.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

A single short sentence is front-loaded and free of filler, so it is not verbose. However, for a seven-parameter filtered-list tool it is under-specified rather than genuinely concise, leaving no room for the one or two clarifying clauses an agent would benefit from.

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?

The tool has seven parameters, no output schema, and behavior modifiers (slim vs raw responses, glob name filtering, merged/unmerged filtering) that the description never touches. Given the complexity and the absence of an output schema to explain returns, the description leaves meaningful gaps.

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 86%, so parameters like raw, name, sort, limit, fields and merged are already documented in the schema. The description contributes no additional parameter meaning, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

"List branches in a project" gives a clear verb plus resource, so an agent knows the operation is a read of branch entities scoped to a project. It does not distinguish this from siblings like gitflic_branch_get (single branch) or gitflic_branch_default, so the differentiation element is absent.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention of alternatives such as gitflic_branch_get for fetching one branch. The agent must infer usage purely from the tool name and the schema.

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