gitlab-api

Update issue

gitlab_update_issue

Idempotent

Updates an existing GitLab issue by changing its title, description, labels, assignees, milestone, or state; use it to keep project issues current and tracked.

Instructions

Update an issue.

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_update_issue"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	No
`page`	No
`state`	No
`title`	No
`labels`	No
`group_id`	No
`per_page`	No
`issue_iid`	No
`max_pages`	No
`project_id`	No
`description`	No
`state_event`	No
`assignee_ids`	No
`milestone_id`	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

D1.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the mutation and safety profile is documented elsewhere. The description adds nothing beyond that — no mention of what happens to omitted fields, permission requirements, or whether state changes trigger side effects like closing the issue.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The single sentence is technically terse but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. There is no front-loaded actionable content because there is essentially no content.

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

Completeness1/5

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

For a 14-parameter mutation endpoint with no output schema and zero schema coverage, the description is completely inadequate. An agent has no way to know which of the many optional parameters to supply, what the data bag accepts, or how pagination fields like page/per_page/max_pages relate to updating a single issue.

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 tool has 14 parameters with 0% schema description coverage, so the schema provides no per-parameter meaning at all. The description supplies none either, leaving critical fields like data, state_event, labels, assignee_ids, and issue_iid completely undocumented — an agent cannot know that state_event controls open/close transitions versus state being a filter.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Update an issue.' merely restates the tool name and title without adding any scope, distinguishing features, or specifics. It does not say which fields can be modified, what an issue is in context, or how this differs from siblings like gitlab_update_epic or gitlab_update_milestone beyond the noun.

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 alternatives such as gitlab_edit_project, gitlab_api_request, or gitlab_graphql. No prerequisites, no exclusions, no note about needing project_id or issue_iid to identify the target.

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

Deploy Server