MCP GitLab Server

gitlab_get_user_resolved_threads

Retrieve discussion threads resolved by a specific user in GitLab code reviews to track review effectiveness, assess collaboration quality, and gain team productivity insights.

Instructions

Get threads resolved by a user in reviews

Find all discussion threads that were resolved by the specified user during code reviews and collaborative processes.

Returns resolved thread information with:

Thread details: original discussion, resolution
Resolution info: how thread was closed, outcome
Context: code changes, review process, participants
Timeline: discussion duration, resolution time
Impact: contribution to code quality and decisions

Use cases:

Code review effectiveness tracking
Collaboration quality assessment
Mentoring and guidance evaluation
Team productivity insights

Parameters:

user_id: Numeric user ID
username: Username string (use either user_id or username)
project_id: Optional project scope filter
resolution_type: How thread was resolved
since: Resolved after date (YYYY-MM-DD)
until: Resolved before date (YYYY-MM-DD)
context_type: Filter by context (MergeRequest, Issue, all)
sort: Sort order (resolved, created, impact)
per_page: Results per page (default: 20)
page: Page number (default: 1)

Example: Get threads resolved in code reviews

{
  "username": "johndoe",
  "context_type": "MergeRequest",
  "since": "2024-01-01",
  "sort": "resolved"
}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`username`	Yes	Username string
`project_id`	No	Optional project scope filter
`since`	No	Threads resolved after date (YYYY-MM-DD)
`until`	No	Threads resolved before date (YYYY-MM-DD)
`per_page`	No	Number of results per page Type: integer Range: 1-100 Default: 20 Example: 50 (for faster browsing) Tip: Use smaller values (10-20) for detailed operations, larger (50-100) for listing
`page`	No	Page number for pagination Type: integer Range: ≥1 Default: 1 Example: 3 (to get the third page of results) Note: Use with per_page to navigate large result sets

Implementation Reference

src/mcp_gitlab/tool_handlers.py:980-999 (handler)

The core handler function for the gitlab_get_user_resolved_threads tool. It validates input arguments (requiring 'username') and delegates to the GitLabClient's get_user_resolved_threads method to fetch the data.

def handle_get_user_resolved_threads(client: GitLabClient, arguments: Optional[Dict[str, Any]]) -> Dict[str, Any]:
    """Handle getting user's resolved threads"""
    username = get_argument(arguments, "username")
    if not username:
        raise ValueError("username is required")
    
    project_id = get_argument(arguments, "project_id")
    since = get_argument(arguments, "since")
    until = get_argument(arguments, "until")
    per_page = get_argument(arguments, "per_page", DEFAULT_PAGE_SIZE)
    page = get_argument(arguments, "page", 1)
    
    return client.get_user_resolved_threads(
        username=username,
        project_id=project_id,
        since=since,
        until=until,
        per_page=per_page,
        page=page
    )

src/mcp_gitlab/tool_handlers.py:1095-1097 (registration)
Registers the handler function for this tool in the TOOL_HANDLERS dictionary, which is used by the MCP server's call_tool dispatcher to route tool calls to the appropriate handler.
```
    TOOL_GET_USER_DISCUSSION_THREADS: handle_get_user_discussion_threads,
    TOOL_GET_USER_RESOLVED_THREADS: handle_get_user_resolved_threads,
}
```

src/mcp_gitlab/server.py:1224-1238 (schema)

Defines the tool's input schema and metadata in the server's list_tools() handler, which is returned to MCP clients describing available tools and their parameters.

    name=TOOL_GET_USER_RESOLVED_THREADS,
    description=desc.DESC_GET_USER_RESOLVED_THREADS,
    inputSchema={
        "type": "object",
        "properties": {
            "username": {"type": "string", "description": "Username string"},
            "project_id": {"type": "string", "description": "Optional project scope filter"},
            "since": {"type": "string", "description": "Threads resolved after date (YYYY-MM-DD)"},
            "until": {"type": "string", "description": "Threads resolved before date (YYYY-MM-DD)"},
            "per_page": {"type": "integer", "description": desc.DESC_PER_PAGE, "default": DEFAULT_PAGE_SIZE, "minimum": 1, "maximum": MAX_PAGE_SIZE},
            "page": {"type": "integer", "description": desc.DESC_PAGE_NUMBER, "default": 1, "minimum": 1}
        },
        "required": ["username"]
    }
)

src/mcp_gitlab/tool_definitions.py:1079-1093 (schema)

Alternative/duplicate tool schema definition, possibly used in tests or documentation.

    name=TOOL_GET_USER_RESOLVED_THREADS,
    description=desc.DESC_GET_USER_RESOLVED_THREADS,
    inputSchema={
        "type": "object",
        "properties": {
            "username": {"type": "string", "description": "Username string"},
            "project_id": {"type": "string", "description": "Optional project scope filter"},
            "since": {"type": "string", "description": "Threads resolved after date (YYYY-MM-DD)"},
            "until": {"type": "string", "description": "Threads resolved before date (YYYY-MM-DD)"},
            "per_page": {"type": "integer", "description": desc.DESC_PER_PAGE, "default": DEFAULT_PAGE_SIZE, "minimum": 1, "maximum": MAX_PAGE_SIZE},
            "page": {"type": "integer", "description": desc.DESC_PAGE_NUMBER, "default": 1, "minimum": 1}
        },
        "required": ["username"]
    }
)

src/mcp_gitlab/server.py:1251-1256 (registration)
The MCP server's call_tool handler dispatches tool execution by looking up the tool name in TOOL_HANDLERS and invoking the corresponding function with the GitLab client and arguments.
```
handler = TOOL_HANDLERS.get(name)
if not handler:
    raise ValueError(f"Unknown tool: {name}")

# Execute the handler
result = handler(client, arguments)
```

Tool Definition Quality

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes what the tool returns (resolved thread information with details like timeline, impact, etc.), which is helpful. However, it lacks critical behavioral information such as whether this is a read-only operation (implied but not stated), pagination behavior (mentioned in parameters but not explained in description), rate limits, authentication requirements, or error conditions. The description adds value but leaves significant gaps.

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?

The description is well-structured with sections for purpose, returns, use cases, parameters, and an example. Most sentences earn their place by adding value. However, it could be more front-loaded—the core purpose is clear early, but the detailed return list and use cases could be trimmed or integrated more tightly. The parameter list is somewhat redundant with the schema but serves as a quick reference.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given no annotations, no output schema, and 6 parameters with full schema coverage, the description is moderately complete. It explains what the tool does and what it returns, but lacks behavioral details like pagination handling, error responses, or performance considerations. The use cases help contextualize, but for a tool with multiple parameters and no structured output, more guidance on result interpretation or limitations would improve completeness.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description lists parameters with brief explanations (e.g., 'user_id: Numeric user ID'), but these add minimal value beyond what's in the schema. It does clarify that 'username' and 'user_id' are alternatives ('use either user_id or username'), which is useful context not in the schema. However, parameters like 'resolution_type' and 'context_type' are listed without enum values or detailed semantics, so the description doesn't fully compensate for schema limitations.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the specific action ('Get threads resolved by a user in reviews') and resource ('discussion threads'), distinguishing it from siblings like gitlab_get_user_discussion_threads (which likely gets all threads) or gitlab_get_user_resolved_issues (which focuses on issues rather than threads). The verb 'Get' combined with the qualifier 'resolved by a user' makes the purpose unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear context for when to use this tool ('code review effectiveness tracking', 'collaboration quality assessment', etc.), but does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or name specific alternatives among the sibling tools. For example, it doesn't contrast with gitlab_get_user_discussion_threads or gitlab_get_user_resolved_issues, which could help the agent choose more precisely.

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

Tool Definition Quality Score (TDQS)
By punkpeye on April 3, 2026.
mcp
The Hackers Who Tracked My Sleep Cycle
By punkpeye on March 26, 2026.
security
Open Source Has a Bot Problem
By punkpeye on March 19, 2026.
open source

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/Vijay-Duke/mcp-gitlab'

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