gitlab-api

Get group releases

gitlab_get_group_releases

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve release information for a GitLab group using its group ID, with pagination and filters for tags, milestones, and dates. List and inspect group releases via the GitLab API.

Instructions

Get information about releases in a group.

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

Returns: Response: A wrapper containing the original response and a list of Release models.

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_releases"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ref`	No
`data`	No
`name`	No
`page`	No
`sort`	No
`simple`	No
`group_id`	No
`order_by`	No
`per_page`	No
`tag_name`	No
`max_pages`	No
`milestones`	No
`project_id`	No
`description`	No
`released_at`	No
`tag_message`	No
`total_pages`	No
`direct_asset_path`	No
`include_html_description`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv27.3.20Nov 7, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / api_parameters

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

First observedv27.3.13Oct 25, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description does add value by disclosing the return shape (a wrapper containing the original response plus a list of Release models) and the error cases (MissingParameterError for missing group_id, ParameterError for invalid parameters). It does not address pagination behavior, which matters for a listing call with page/per_page/max_pages parameters.

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 prose is short and front-loaded with the purpose statement, but it is a docstring with boilerplate Args/Returns/Raises sections where the Args section conveys almost nothing ('**kwargs: Additional parameters'). The Returns and Raises lines do earn their place.

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 19-parameter listing tool with no output schema and zero schema descriptions, the definition is far too thin: no filter semantics, no pagination explanation, and no indication of which parameters actually apply to a read operation. The return-wrapper and error notes help but do not cover the gaps an agent needs to call this correctly.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The schema has 19 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the description only names group_id via 'e.g., group_id'. Filters such as tag_name, milestones, sort/order_by, simple, include_html_description, and the pagination parameters are left entirely unexplained, and several parameters (ref, data, name, tag_message, released_at) appear to be write-oriented and are never clarified.

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 (get releases in a group) and the title matches. It implicitly distinguishes itself from project-scoped siblings like gitlab_get_releases and gitlab_get_latest_release by scoping to a group, though it never names those alternatives explicitly.

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 use this tool versus gitlab_get_releases, gitlab_get_latest_release, or gitlab_get_release_by_tag, and no statement of prerequisites or supported filters. The agent must infer usage entirely from the tool name.

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

Deploy Server