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

mcp-gitlab-crunchtools

by crunchtools
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Search Global Tool

search_global_tool
Read-only

Search across GitLab resources accessible by your token—covering projects, issues, merge requests, commits, and more—to find relevant items.

Instructions

Search across all GitLab resources accessible by the token.

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": {
      "search": "<search>"
    },
    "name": "search_global_tool"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoPage number (default: 1)
scopeNoSearch scope (projects, issues, merge_requests, milestones, snippet_titles, wiki_blobs, commits, blobs, notes, users)projects
searchYesSearch query string
per_pageNoResults per page, max 100 (default: 20)

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 supply readOnlyHint=true, so safety is already covered, but the description adds almost nothing beyond the title: no pagination behavior for a result set that spans ten resource types, no note that results are token-scoped for auth, and no indication of ordering or limits. Only the token-access boundary is disclosed.

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 zero filler. It is efficient, but the brevity is achieved by omission rather than by tight phrasing of necessary detail.

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 four-parameter, ten-scope, paginated cross-resource search, the description leaves the scope semantics, result granularity, and sibling differentiation unaddressed. The output schema covers return values, but an agent still cannot tell from this text when to prefer it over search_project_tool.

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 scope, page, per_page, and search are all documented in the schema, making 3 the baseline. The description adds no extra meaning, notably omitting that 'scope' selects among ten resource types, which is the single most consequential choice for this tool.

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 ('search') and a scope ('all GitLab resources accessible by the token'), which implicitly frames it as the global counterpart to search_project_tool. However it never names that sibling or clarifies what 'search' matches (titles, descriptions, code), so the boundary is inferred 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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no when-not-to-use, and no mention of search_project_tool as the narrower alternative despite it being a direct sibling. An agent must infer that 'global' means cross-project from a single adjective.

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