Repository navigation
Excessive context usage for tools #1286
Description
I went from 34k tokens to 80k tokens just by adding the github mcp to Claude Code. Even though I am specifying an explicit toolset representing only things I'd use on a day to day basis as a developer, there are over 66 tools!
My MCP registration in Claude Code:
"github": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://api.githubcopilot.com/mcp",
"headers": {
"Authorization": "Bearer SNIP",
"X-MCP-Toolsets": "context,orgs,repos,issues,pull_requests,actions,discussions,actions"
}
}Before I added Github MCP:
And after:
I really want to use this MCP server because claude is so much more efficient with it than the gh CLI. However, being able to use nearly only half of Claude 4.5's available context for a single MCP tool is just too much for me.
I was really hoping this was optimized but it doesn't seem so. I hope the team can address the volume of tools soon. I think some consolidation is desperately needed.
Activity
tommaso-moro commentedon Oct 28, 2025
Hi @rcdailey thank you for reporting this. We share your concern, which is why this has been a top priority for us.
In our latest releases, we have significantly consolidated our tools. The latest consolidation was released yesterday as part of v0.20: https://github.com/github/github-mcp-server/releases/tag/v0.20.0 where issue tools have been consolidated.
This should further reduce the context usage on your end. We will keep working hard on this, so stay tuned for updates!
Regarding this:
Could you share more details on how your experience has been using the MCP vs the gh CLI, and in what ways you have been finding the MCP to be superior? This kind of feedback really helps us improve the MCP server!
rcdailey commentedon Oct 28, 2025
When you consolidate tools, should I expect the total tool count to go down with those releases, or do they remain for some compatibility/transition period?
For starters:
ghCLI correctly unless you keep a cheat sheet in its context (it frequently uses the tool wrong such as passing in invalid options)tommaso-moro commentedon Oct 28, 2025
You can expect the total tool count to go down. For example in v0.20.0:
issue_readconsolidates 4 tools (get_issue,get_issue_comments,list_labels,list_sub_issues)issue_writeconsolidates 2 tools (create_issue,update_issue)sub_issue_writeconsolidates 3 tools (add_sub_issue,remove_sub_issueandreprioritize_sub_issue)So in that release alone we consolidated 9 tools into 3, and we had a similar approach in releases 0.19.0, 0.18.0, 0.17.0.
Thank you so much for the feedback on your experience of
ghCLI vs MCP!Dave-London commentedon Mar 8, 2026
Same experience — MCP tools loading dozens of tool definitions eats context fast. On the output side, we found that returning structured JSON with only actionable fields (via
structuredContent) instead of raw CLI text cuts per-call token usage by 60-92%. That's the approach behind Pare for dev tools like git, docker, npm, etc.SamMorrowDrums commentedon Mar 8, 2026
Worth mentioning in last couple of releases we've massively reduced tool output sizes for substantial number of tools, and we have also looked at output schemas here: https://github.com/LucaButBoring/github-mcp-server
So things are continuing to improve.
yifanyifan897645 commentedon Mar 30, 2026
For anyone benchmarking how much context the GitHub MCP server actually uses, mcp-checkup gives exact token counts per tool. Useful for deciding which toolsets to enable.
npx mcp-checkup