Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
gitlab-api

gitlab-api

by Knuckles-Team
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Get namespace

gitlab_get_namespace
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch information about a GitLab namespace by ID, returning namespace metadata and the original API response for lookup and validation.

Instructions

Get information about a specific namespace.

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

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

Raises: MissingParameterError: If the namespace_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_namespace"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNo
searchNo
max_pagesNo
owned_onlyNo
namespace_idNo
top_level_onlyNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv27.3.20
    • removedInput schema / properties / api_parameters
      Removed value: -{
-  "anyOf": [
-    {
-      "additionalProperties": true,
-      "type": "object"
-    },
-    {
-      "type": "null"
-    }
-  ],
-  "default": null
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / max_pages
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null
+}
  2. First observedv27.3.13

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds failure behavior (MissingParameterError when namespace_id is absent, ParameterError for invalid params), but says nothing about what the returned Namespace model contains or how pagination-related flags behave. It also implies namespace_id is required while the schema lists zero required parameters, a discrepancy the agent must resolve.

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 summary sentence is front-loaded and clear, but the docstring boilerplate ('**kwargs: Additional parameters for the request') conveys nothing and the Args/Returns/Raises scaffolding is verbose relative to the information delivered.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With six parameters, no output schema, and zero schema descriptions, the definition is far from complete: it neither explains the five undocumented flags nor clarifies whether namespace_id is truly required. The one thing it does establish well, error conditions, is not enough for a tool of this parameter surface.

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%, so the description must carry the burden, yet it mentions only namespace_id (and only in the Raises block) while ignoring data, search, max_pages, owned_only, and top_level_only. Several of those flags look like list-endpoint parameters, which leaves the agent unable to tell which parameters this tool actually honors.

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 information about a specific namespace'), so the agent knows this is a single-resource read. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling gitlab_get_namespaces, which is presumably the plural/list counterpart.

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 explicit guidance on when to call this versus gitlab_get_namespaces or gitlab_get_group; the word 'specific' weakly implies single-resource lookup. No prerequisites, no exclusion conditions, and no alternatives are named.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools