Files
holocron/plugins/gitea/.apm/skills/gitea-branches/references/branches.md
Defame1297 ee812699a4 refactor(gitea-branches): retrofit to the ADR-0020 context contract
Description 688 -> 282 chars, body 435 -> 293 words, Gotchas 5 entries/54% of
body -> 3/23.5%. Clears the description FAIL and the Gotchas suggestion.

Cut the second trigger register (six re-quoted user phrasings) and the capability
enumeration; both moved to a new Boundaries section in the skill's own README.
Kept all three boundary clauses -- git-branches, git-history and gitea-prs each
defend a real activation steal, and gitea-prs is now the only guard on the
branch/PR collision in either direction since gitea-prs's own retrofit narrowed
its boundary to issues. Written as one arrow per target: the resolver extracts
only the first name per arrow clause, so conjoined targets go unchecked.

Two Gotchas deleted -- one paraphrased the step below it (its non-obvious half,
the get_me/list_my_repos token-scope block, was folded into that step), the other
is carried in full by references/branches.md:40-52.

Repoint two reference pointers the rename broke: branches.md and commits.md named
Gotchas by titles this retrofit changed. Now named by stable descriptors.

Refs #99
2026-08-30 12:08:38 +00:00

3.1 KiB

topic, source_keys
topic source_keys
branches
gitea-mcp-repo
gitea-mcp-slim-go

Branch operations

Call signatures below were verified live against the deployed gitea-mcp server via ToolSearch at authoring time, not copied from research docs — this is deliberate: research docs are generated from source code at a point in time and can drift from the server actually deployed. Re-verify against the live schema if these tools appear to behave differently than documented here.

list_branches

Parameters:

  • owner (string, required)
  • repo (string, required)
  • page (number, optional, default: 1)
  • per_page (number, optional, default: 30)

Call:

list_branches owner: <owner> repo: <repo>

Response: one object per branch: name, protected (bool), commit_sha (present when the underlying commit data is available).

Paginate if you need the full list (see Gotchas in SKILL.md) — iterate page until the returned count is less than per_page.

create_branch

Parameters:

  • owner (string, required)
  • repo (string, required)
  • branch (string, required) — new branch name
  • old_branch (string, optional) — source branch; if omitted, defaults to the repo's default branch server-side (not necessarily your current local checkout)

Call:

create_branch owner: <owner> repo: <repo> branch: <new-name> old_branch: <source-branch>

Default dispatch: if the user gives a base ("branch off of X", "from X"), pass it as old_branch. If they don't specify a base and you're mid-task on a local branch, pass your current branch (git branch --show-current) as old_branch so the new branch forks from where you're actually working, rather than silently falling back to the repo default. If neither applies (e.g. a fresh top-level request with no working branch context), omit old_branch and let it default server-side.

A branch name collision returns 409 Conflict.

delete_branch

Parameters:

  • owner (string, required)
  • repo (string, required)
  • branch (string, required)

Call:

delete_branch owner: <owner> repo: <repo> branch: <name>

Before calling this, see the delete_branch Gotcha in SKILL.md. If the target branch's name isn't obviously a scratch/feature branch, call list_branches first and check protected on the matching entry — name-matching main/master alone isn't authoritative, since a repo can protect a differently-named default branch. Confirm explicitly with the user before deleting anything protected, every time, regardless of how the request is phrased.

Token scope

All three — list_branches, create_branch, delete_branch — require write:repository. Gitea gates reads behind write scope for repo-scoped operations, so list_branches needs the same scope as the write operations, not write:issue alone. An earlier version of this doc claimed write:issue alone was sufficient for list_branches, based on empirical testing under a token that held both write:issue and write:repository simultaneously — that test didn't isolate the variable, so it couldn't actually establish write:issue alone as sufficient.