GitFlic MCP Server

gitflic_project_edit

DestructiveIdempotent

Updates a GitFlic project's title, description, or language through change-setting. Use it to correct project metadata; visibility and default branch cannot be edited via REST API.

Instructions

Edit project title, description, or language (via change-setting). Visibility and default branch are not editable over the REST API.

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_project_edit"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`raw`	No	Return the full, un-slimmed GitFlic response for THIS call (no token compression). Use when the default slim view dropped a field you need.
`title`	No
`project`	Yes
`language`	No
`description`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.5.1Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the genuine value of disclosing a REST API limitation on visibility and default branch, but says nothing about permission requirements or partial-update behavior for omitted fields.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the editable fields and followed by the exclusion, with no filler. The '(via change-setting)' parenthetical is slightly opaque jargon but still earns its place as a hint about the underlying endpoint.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a five-parameter metadata mutation whose annotations already carry the safety and idempotency profile and which has no output schema, this covers what an agent needs to avoid misusing it. The remaining gap is permission/auth expectations and whether the call is a partial or full update.

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 only 20% (just `raw`), so the description must compensate and it partly does by mapping three parameters (title, description, language) to their meaning. It leaves `project`, the sole required parameter, unexplained — the agent is not told it is the project identifier, nor what format it takes.

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?

States a specific verb (edit) and enumerates the editable resources (title, description, language), which cleanly separates it from gitflic_project_create and gitflic_project_get. It does not name a sibling for the excluded fields, but the scope is unambiguous.

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?

Provides useful negative guidance — visibility and default branch cannot be changed via REST — which implicitly steers an agent away from attempting those edits. However, it never names the correct alternative (e.g. gitflic_branch_default for the default branch) or states prerequisites such as required role or project ownership.

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

Deploy Server