GitLab MCP Server

delete_label

Remove a label from a GitLab project to clean up issue tracking and project organization by specifying the project and label identifiers.

Instructions

Delete a label from a 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>",
      "label_id": "<label_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_label"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`project_id`	Yes	Project ID or URL-encoded path
`label_id`	Yes	The ID or title of a project's label

Implementation Reference

schemas.ts:1161-1164 (schema)

Zod input schema defining parameters for the delete_label tool: project_id (string) and label_id (string). This validates the tool's input.

export const DeleteLabelSchema = z.object({
  project_id: z.string().describe("Project ID or URL-encoded path"),
  label_id: z.string().describe("The ID or title of a project's label"),
});

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.0Jan 3, 2026
- addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
First observedNov 16, 2025

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the destructive action ('Delete') but doesn't describe consequences (e.g., whether deletion is permanent, if it affects associated issues, or what permissions are required). For a destructive tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it immediately scannable and appropriately sized for a simple operation.

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 incomplete. It doesn't address behavioral aspects like permanence, side effects, error conditions, or response format. The agent lacks sufficient context to use this tool safely and effectively.

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 both parameters clearly documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema (e.g., format examples or constraints). Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 resource ('a label from a project'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'create_label' and 'update_label' by specifying deletion, but doesn't explicitly contrast with 'get_label' or 'list_labels' beyond the verb difference.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing label), when deletion is appropriate versus updating, or what happens after deletion. The agent must infer usage from the verb alone.

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