Skip to main content
Glama

gitlab_list_project_members

Retrieve all contributors for a GitLab project by providing a merge request URL, enabling visibility into team members involved in development.

Instructions

Lists all members (contributors) of a given GitLab project.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
mrUrlYesThe URL of a GitLab Merge Request within the project.

Implementation Reference

  • src/index.ts:185-197 (registration)
    Tool registration and input schema definition for gitlab_list_project_members.
      name: 'gitlab_list_project_members',
      description: 'Lists all members (contributors) of a given GitLab project.',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          mrUrl: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'The URL of a GitLab Merge Request within the project.',
          },
        },
        required: ['mrUrl'],
      },
    },
  • Handler implementation that extracts mrUrl from arguments, parses it to get projectPath using the service, fetches members, and returns JSON.
    case 'gitlab_list_project_members': {
      if (!gitlabService) {
        throw new Error('GitLab service is not initialized.');
      }
      const { mrUrl } = args as { mrUrl: string };
      const result = await gitlabService.listProjectMembersFromMrUrl(mrUrl);
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: 'text',
            text: JSON.stringify(result, null, 2),
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • Convenience helper that parses MR URL to extract project path and delegates to listProjectMembers.
    async listProjectMembersFromMrUrl(mrUrl: string): Promise<any[]> {
      const { projectPath } = this.parseMrUrl(mrUrl, this.config.url);
      return this.listProjectMembers(projectPath);
    }
  • Core helper function that calls GitLab API endpoint /projects/{projectPath}/members/all to list all project members.
    async listProjectMembers(projectPath: string): Promise<any[]> {
      const encodedProjectPath = encodeURIComponent(projectPath);
      return this.callGitLabApi<any[]>(
        `projects/${encodedProjectPath}/members/all`,
      );
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While it correctly describes a read operation ('Lists'), it provides no information about permissions required, pagination behavior, rate limits, error conditions, or what the output format looks like. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence that communicates the core purpose without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple list operation and gets straight to the point with no unnecessary elaboration.

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?

For a tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain why an MR URL is needed to list project members (rather than a project identifier), what the output format will be, or any behavioral characteristics. The combination of missing structured data and minimal description leaves significant gaps for an agent trying to use this tool effectively.

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?

The schema has 100% description coverage, with the single parameter 'mrUrl' clearly documented as 'The URL of a GitLab Merge Request within the project.' The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's already in the schema, which is acceptable given the high schema coverage. The baseline score of 3 reflects adequate but minimal value addition.

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 action ('Lists') and resource ('all members of a given GitLab project'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from the sibling tool 'gitlab_list_project_members_by_project_name', which appears to serve a similar function but uses a different parameter approach.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't explain why one would use this tool (which requires an MR URL) instead of 'gitlab_list_project_members_by_project_name' (which presumably uses a project name), nor does it mention any prerequisites or constraints for usage.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/HainanZhao/mcp-gitlab-jira'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server