gitlab-api

Get project merge requests

gitlab_get_project_merge_requests

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve and filter merge requests for a specific GitLab project to track code changes, review progress, and manage collaboration.

Instructions

Get merge requests for a specific project.

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

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

Raises: MissingParameterError: If the project_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_project_merge_requests"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`wip`	No
`data`	No
`page`	No
`sort`	No
`view`	No
`scope`	No
`state`	No
`title`	No
`labels`	No
`search`	No
`squash`	No
`order_by`	No
`per_page`	No
`author_id`	No
`max_pages`	No
`milestone`	No
`search_in`	No
`project_id`	No
`assignee_id`	No
`description`	No
`environment`	No
`reviewer_id`	No
`approver_ids`	No
`assignee_ids`	No
`milestone_id`	No
`reviewer_ids`	No
`created_after`	No
`source_branch`	No
`target_branch`	No
`updated_after`	No
`created_before`	No
`deployed_after`	No
`search_exclude`	No
`updated_before`	No
`approved_by_ids`	No
`author_username`	No
`deployed_before`	No
`my_reaction_emoji`	No
`reviewer_username`	No
`target_project_id`	No
`allow_collaboration`	No
`with_labels_details`	No
`remove_source_branch`	No
`approvals_before_merge`	No
`allow_maintainer_to_push`	No
`with_merge_status_recheck`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 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 / max_pages / default
```
Previous value: -0New value: +null
```
changedInput schema / properties / page / default
```
Previous value: -1New value: +null
```
changedInput schema / properties / per_page / default
```
Previous value: -100New value: +null
```

Changed2 schema fields changedv27.3.18Nov 6, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / title / default
```
Added value: +null
```
- removedInput schema / required
```
Removed value: -[
-  "title"
-]
```
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?

The annotations already declare this is a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world operation, so safety is covered. The description adds useful context that the result wraps the original response plus a list of MergeRequest models and that missing or invalid parameters raise specific errors, but it does not explain pagination behavior despite page, per_page, and 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 description is short and front-loads the core purpose, but it uses Python docstring boilerplate and describes **kwargs even though the schema exposes explicit named parameters with additionalProperties false. The Args/Returns/Raises structure is readable but partially mismatched to the actual schema.

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 46 filter parameters, no output schema, and no schema parameter descriptions, this description is far too thin. It covers the return wrapper and error cases but omits filter semantics, pagination behavior, and differentiation from sibling merge-request listing tools.

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 46 parameters with 0% description coverage, yet the description only mentions project_id as an example of **kwargs. It adds no meaning for filters such as state, scope, view, search_in, wip, reviewer_id, with_merge_status_recheck, or the date-range parameters, leaving the agent almost entirely dependent on parameter names alone.

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 sentence states a specific verb and resource: retrieving merge requests scoped to a single project. It does not differentiate this tool from close siblings such as gitlab_get_merge_requests or gitlab_get_group_merge_requests, which could otherwise be selected by mistake.

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?

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool instead of the project-wide or group-wide merge request listing siblings, and no exclusions or prerequisites beyond an implied project_id requirement in the Raises section. Only the MissingParameterError indirectly signals that project_id is needed.

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

Deploy Server