Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
gitlab-api

gitlab-api

by Knuckles-Team
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Gitlab Graphql Ops Get Job

gitlab_graphql_ops_get_job
Read-only

Retrieve details for a single GitLab CI job via GraphQL by providing the project ID or path and job ID.

Instructions

Read one CI job through GraphQL.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "project_id": "<project_id>",
      "job_id": "<job_id>"
    },
    "name": "gitlab_graphql_ops_get_job"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
job_idYesJob id.
project_idYesProject id or full path.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv27.3.20
    • addedInput schema / properties / job_id
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Job id.",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / params_json
      Removed value: -{
-  "default": "{}",
-  "description": "JSON string of parameters to pass to the action.",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / project_id
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Project id or full path.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / required
      Added value: +[
+  "project_id",
+  "job_id"
+]
  2. First observedv27.3.13

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes the safety profile, so the description's only contribution is 'through GraphQL' as transport detail. It says nothing about auth/permission requirements, error behavior for missing or inaccessible jobs, or what fields come back — and with no output schema, that last point matters.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant phrasing. It is efficient but borders on under-specification rather than being deliberately terse.

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?

The tool is simple (two required params, read-only) and the schema plus annotation cover the inputs and safety. However, with no output schema the description should hint at what a job record contains or how to handle a not-found job, and it leaves both unaddressed.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and both parameters are documented there ('Job id.', 'Project id or full path.'). The description adds no further meaning, which is acceptable at full coverage but is pure baseline.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Read one CI job') plus the transport ('through GraphQL'), which distinguishes it from the REST-flavored sibling gitlab_get_project_job. It does not explicitly name that sibling, so differentiation is implicit rather than stated.

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?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. An agent facing both gitlab_get_project_job and this tool must infer that the 'GraphQL' wording is the only selection criterion, and nothing says when the GraphQL path is preferable or required.

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