Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-gitlab-crunchtools

mcp-gitlab-crunchtools

by crunchtools
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

List Pipelines Tool

list_pipelines_tool
Read-only

List and filter CI/CD pipelines for a GitLab project by branch, tag, status, or sort order to review build and deployment runs.

Instructions

List CI/CD pipelines for a GitLab project.

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>"
    },
    "name": "list_pipelines_tool"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
refNoFilter by branch or tag name
pageNoPage number (default: 1)
sortNoSort direction (asc, desc)desc
statusNoFilter by status (created, waiting_for_resource, preparing, pending, running, success, failed, canceled, skipped, manual, scheduled)
order_byNoOrder by field (id, status, ref, updated_at, user_id)id
per_pageNoResults per page, max 100 (default: 20)
project_idYesProject ID or path

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.1

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds nothing further — no pagination behavior, no note that per_page is capped, no indication of result ordering defaults. It largely restates the name/title rather than adding behavioral context.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero waste. It is efficient but borders on under-specification given the tool's seven filter parameters; nothing is padded, but little is conveyed either.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, and annotations carry the safety profile. Still, for a paginated, filterable list tool with several sibling list/get tools, the description does not say enough to route an agent confidently between them.

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%, with all seven parameters (ref, status, sort, order_by, page, per_page, project_id) individually documented in the schema. The description adds no meaning beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 clear verb+resource: 'List CI/CD pipelines for a GitLab project.' An agent immediately knows this enumerates pipelines scoped to one project. However, it never differentiates from close siblings like get_pipeline_tool (single pipeline) or list_pipeline_jobs_tool, so disambiguation is left to the name alone.

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 on when to use this versus get_pipeline_tool or list_pipeline_jobs_tool, nor any prerequisite context (e.g., that it requires a valid project ID/path). Usage is only implied by the tool name and the required project_id parameter.

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