Skip to main content
Glama

delete_milestone

Remove a milestone from a GitLab project to manage project timelines and track progress by deleting outdated or completed milestones.

Instructions

Delete a milestone from a GitLab project

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYes
milestone_idYes

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that performs the actual API call to delete a milestone in GitLab.
    export async function deleteMilestone(projectId: string, milestoneId: number): Promise<void> {
      if (!projectId?.trim()) {
        throw new Error("Project ID is required");
      }
      if (!milestoneId || milestoneId < 1) {
        throw new Error("Valid milestone ID is required");
      }
    
      const endpoint = `/projects/${encodeProjectId(projectId)}/milestones/${milestoneId}`;
      await gitlabDelete(endpoint);
    }
  • Zod schema for validating the input arguments for delete_milestone.
    export const DeleteMilestoneSchema = z.object({
      project_id: z.string(),
      milestone_id: z.number()
    });
  • src/server.ts:145-148 (registration)
    Registration of the delete_milestone tool in the MCP server.
      name: "delete_milestone",
      description: "Delete a milestone from a GitLab project",
      inputSchema: zodToJsonSchema(DeleteMilestoneSchema)
    },
  • The request handler logic that dispatches the tool call to the API function.
    case "delete_milestone": {
      const args = DeleteMilestoneSchema.parse(request.params.arguments);
      await api.deleteMilestone(args.project_id, args.milestone_id);
      return { content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify({ success: true }, null, 2) }] };
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It states it's a deletion operation (implying destructive), but doesn't cover critical aspects like permissions required, irreversibility, effects on associated issues, or error handling (e.g., if milestone doesn't exist).

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, direct sentence with zero wasted words. It front-loads the core action and resource efficiently, making it easy to parse without unnecessary elaboration.

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 destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It misses essential context: no information on return values (e.g., success confirmation or error), side effects, or behavioral constraints, leaving significant gaps for safe agent invocation.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate but adds no parameter details. It implies 'project_id' and 'milestone_id' are needed but doesn't explain their formats (e.g., numeric vs. string IDs) or sources. Baseline is 3 since schema covers parameters structurally, but semantics are lacking.

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 clearly states the action ('Delete') and the resource ('a milestone from a GitLab project'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'delete_group_milestone' by specifying 'project' context, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with other deletion tools like 'delete_label'.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing existing milestones), exclusions (e.g., cannot delete active milestones), or comparisons with siblings like 'delete_group_milestone' for group-level deletions.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/TheRealChrisThomas/gitlab-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server