gitlab-api

Get latest release asset

gitlab_get_latest_release_asset

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the asset file from a project's latest GitLab release by specifying project ID and asset path. Returns raw asset data for download or processing.

Instructions

Get the asset for the latest release in a project.

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

Returns: Response: A wrapper containing the original response and the raw asset data.

Raises: MissingParameterError: If the project_id or direct_asset_path 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_latest_release_asset"
  }
}

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

B3.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare this as a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world operation, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful error behavior and a brief return-wrapper note, but it does not disclose authentication requirements, rate limits, or what 'raw asset data' concretely contains.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is short, front-loaded with the purpose, and organized into Args, Returns, and Raises sections. The only inefficiency is the generic '**kwargs' entry, which adds little because the actual relevant parameters are mostly undocumented.

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 19 parameters, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is not complete enough to guide correct invocation. It clarifies two key parameters and error conditions, but leaves most parameter semantics and the shape of the returned asset data under-specified.

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 0% and there are 19 parameters, so the description carries the full burden of explaining parameters. It only names project_id and direct_asset_path as examples and indicates they may be required via MissingParameterError, leaving the other 17 parameters without any contextual meaning.

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 the asset for the latest release in a project. It is clear enough to identify the operation, but it does not distinguish this from close siblings such as gitlab_get_latest_release or gitlab_download_release_asset.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied by the purpose and by the listed MissingParameterError for project_id or direct_asset_path, which signals required inputs. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus related tools like gitlab_download_release_asset, and no when-not conditions are provided.

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

Deploy Server