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

mcp-gitlab-crunchtools

by crunchtools
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Update Milestone Tool

update_milestone_tool

Update an existing GitLab project milestone's title, dates, description, or state to keep release tracking accurate.

Instructions

Update an existing milestone.

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>",
      "milestone_id": "<milestone_id>"
    },
    "name": "update_milestone_tool"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleNoNew title
due_dateNoNew due date (YYYY-MM-DD)
project_idYesProject ID or path
start_dateNoNew start date (YYYY-MM-DD)
descriptionNoNew description (Markdown)
state_eventNoState transition (close, activate)
milestone_idYesMilestone ID

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.6.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / milestone_id / minimum
      Added value: +1
  2. First observedv0.4.1

TDQS

C2.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the entire behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing. It does not explain that the optional fields default to null and therefore mean 'leave unchanged' (partial update semantics), does not describe the effect of state_event values like close/activate, and says nothing about permissions or reversibility of the mutation.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The single sentence is front-loaded and free of padding, so it is structurally fine. However, its brevity comes from under-specification rather than economy of expression, so it cannot score highly on this dimension.

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 seven-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no safety hints, the description is far too thin; only the existence of an output schema relieves it of explaining return values. An agent can call it but cannot predict the null-means-unchanged behavior or the state transition semantics from the description alone.

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 every one of the seven parameters is documented in the schema, including date formats and the state_event options. The description adds nothing beyond that, which is acceptable but not additive, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 sentence 'Update an existing milestone' essentially restates the tool name and title with no added specificity. It does convey the verb and resource and the notion that the milestone must already exist, but an agent learns nothing about scope (which fields, which project context) that the name did not already imply.

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 versus create_milestone_tool or list_milestones_tool, and no mention of prerequisites such as needing an existing milestone_id or write permission. Usage must be fully inferred from the name.

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