gitlab-api

Get group

gitlab_get_group

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetches details for a GitLab group using its ID, returning group settings, visibility, and configuration so you can inspect or manage the group.

Instructions

Get details of a specific group.

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

Returns: Response: A wrapper containing the original response and a Group model.

Raises: MissingParameterError: If the group_id is missing. ParameterError: If invalid parameters are provided.

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_get_group"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	No
`name`	No
`page`	No
`path`	No
`avatar`	No
`argument`	No
`group_id`	No
`per_page`	No
`max_pages`	No
`visibility`	No
`description`	No
`lfs_enabled`	No
`total_pages`	No
`default_branch`	No
`emails_enabled`	No
`membership_lock`	No
`mentions_disabled`	No
`wiki_access_level`	No
`auto_devops_enabled`	No
`duo_features_enabled`	No
`ip_restriction_ranges`	No
`share_with_group_lock`	No
`project_creation_level`	No
`request_access_enabled`	No
`shared_runners_setting`	No
`subgroup_creation_level`	No
`two_factor_grace_period`	No
`file_template_project_id`	No
`default_branch_protection`	No
`lock_duo_features_enabled`	No
`allowed_email_domains_list`	No
`enabled_git_access_protocol`	No
`shared_runners_minutes_limit`	No
`math_rendering_limits_enabled`	No
`prevent_forking_outside_group`	No
`unique_project_download_limit`	No
`require_two_factor_authentication`	No
`default_branch_protection_defaults`	No
`extra_shared_runners_minutes_limit`	No
`lock_math_rendering_limits_enabled`	No
`unique_project_download_limit_alertlist`	No
`unique_project_download_limit_allowlist`	No
`prevent_sharing_groups_outside_hierarchy`	No
`auto_ban_user_on_excessive_projects_download`	No
`unique_project_download_limit_interval_in_seconds`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed6 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 / argument / default
```
Previous value: -"state=opened"New value: +null
```

removedInput schema / properties / avatar / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "format": "binary",
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

addedInput schema / properties / avatar / title
```
Added value: +"Avatar"
```
changedInput schema / properties / page / default
```
Previous value: -1New value: +null
```
changedInput schema / properties / per_page / default
```
Previous value: -100New value: +null
```

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 readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond that: the required-identifier failure mode (MissingParameterError) and the shape of the return (a wrapper containing the original response and a Group model). It still omits permission scope and whether the many optional fields affect the read.

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 description is short and front-loads the one-line purpose, which is good. But the docstring boilerplate (Args/Returns/Raises with a bare '**kwargs' entry) spends the remaining space on a stub that adds nothing for the majority of parameters.

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 45 undocumented parameters, zero schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is far too thin. An agent can identify the resource and the required id, but cannot reason about which of the dozens of fields matter or what a successful response contains beyond 'a Group model'.

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?

The schema has 45 parameters at 0% description coverage, so the description carries the full burden and covers exactly one of them (group_id). Worse, the 'Args: **kwargs' framing misrepresents a fully typed 45-field schema and gives no clue whether fields like visibility, lfs_enabled or default_branch are filters or ignored read-path noise.

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 first line gives a specific verb and resource: 'Get details of a specific group', which an agent can map to a read of one group. It does not, however, distinguish this tool from the many adjacent group tools in the sibling list (gitlab_get_groups, gitlab_get_group_projects, gitlab_get_group_subgroups, gitlab_edit_group), leaving the single-vs-list boundary implicit.

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?

There is no guidance on when to choose this over gitlab_get_groups or the various group sub-resource tools, and no stated prerequisites such as visibility or permission requirements. The only implicit cue is the MissingParameterError note, which hints group_id is needed but never says so as usage advice.

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

Deploy Server