gitlab-api

Delete group deploy token

gitlab_delete_group_deploy_token

DestructiveIdempotent

Deletes a deploy token for a GitLab group using group_id and deploy_token_id, with an optional confirmation for destructive operations.

Instructions

Delete a deploy token for a group.

Args: **kwargs: Additional parameters for the request (e.g., group_id, deploy_token_id).

Returns: Response: A wrapper containing the original response (no data for successful deletion).

Raises: ParameterError: If invalid parameters are provided. MissingParameterError: If required parameters are missing.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "gitlab_delete_group_deploy_token"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No
`page`	No
`token`	No
`scopes`	No
`confirm`	No	Explicitly confirm this destructive operation. Needed only when the client cannot answer a confirmation prompt.
`group_id`	No
`per_page`	No
`username`	No
`max_pages`	No
`expires_at`	No
`project_id`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv27.3.20Nov 7, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / api_parameters

Removed value: -{
-  "anyOf": [
-    {
-      "additionalProperties": true,
-      "type": "object"
-    },
-    {
-      "type": "null"
-    }
-  ],
-  "default": null
-}

changedInput schema / properties / page / default
```
Previous value: -1New value: +null
```
changedInput schema / properties / per_page / default
```
Previous value: -100New value: +null
```

Changed1 schema field changedv27.3.18Nov 6, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / confirm

Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "Explicitly confirm this destructive operation. Needed only when the client cannot answer a confirmation prompt.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

First observedv27.3.13Oct 25, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare the destructive, idempotent, and open-world nature of the operation. The description adds that successful deletion returns no data and names parameter error types, but it does not explain permissions, recoverability, or how the confirm parameter affects behavior.

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?

The first sentence is clear and front-loaded, and the return/error notes add some value. However, the Args section uses generic **kwargs and an inaccurate deploy_token_id example, making the structure less useful than it could be.

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?

This is a destructive operation with 11 parameters, no output schema, and very low schema description coverage. The description does not identify required identifiers, permission requirements, or the confirmation flow, leaving important operational context missing despite helpful annotations.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 9%, with just the confirm parameter documented in the schema. The description mentions group_id and deploy_token_id, but deploy_token_id is absent from the schema, while the actual token parameter and most other parameters remain unexplained.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Delete a deploy token for a group.' The 'group' scope helps distinguish it from project deploy token deletion, though it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives.

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?

It provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings such as gitlab_delete_project_deploy_token or gitlab_get_group_deploy_token. It also omits prerequisites, confirmation workflow, and whether the deletion is irreversible.

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

Deploy Server