Skip to main content
Glama
harshmaur

GitLab MCP Server

by harshmaur

list_namespaces

Retrieve all GitLab namespaces accessible to your account, with options to search, filter by ownership, and paginate results.

Instructions

List all namespaces available to the current user

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
searchNoSearch term for namespaces
ownedNoFilter for namespaces owned by current user
pageNoPage number for pagination (default: 1)
per_pageNoNumber of items per page (max: 100, default: 20)

Implementation Reference

  • Input schema for the 'list_namespaces' tool, defining parameters like search term and owned filter, merged with pagination options.
    export const ListNamespacesSchema = z.object({
      search: z.string().optional().describe("Search term for namespaces"),
      owned: z.boolean().optional().describe("Filter for namespaces owned by current user"),
    }).merge(PaginationOptionsSchema);
  • Response schema defining the structure of a GitLab namespace object, likely used as output for list_namespaces tool.
    export const GitLabNamespaceSchema = z.object({
      id: z.number(),
      name: z.string(),
      path: z.string(),
      kind: z.enum(["user", "group"]),
      full_path: z.string(),
      parent_id: z.number().nullable(),
      avatar_url: z.string().nullable(),
      web_url: z.string(),
      members_count_with_descendants: z.number().optional(),
      billable_members_count: z.number().optional(),
      max_seats_used: z.number().optional(),
      seats_in_use: z.number().optional(),
      plan: z.string().optional(),
      end_date: z.string().nullable().optional(),
      trial_ends_on: z.string().nullable().optional(),
      trial: z.boolean().optional(),
      root_repository_size: z.number().optional(),
      projects_count: z.number().optional(),
    });
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'available to the current user', hinting at access control, but doesn't cover critical aspects like pagination behavior (implied by parameters but not described), rate limits, error conditions, or the format of returned data. This is inadequate for a list operation with multiple parameters.

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 purpose, making it easy to parse quickly. Every part of the sentence earns its place by specifying the action and scope.

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?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool with four parameters and list functionality. It doesn't explain the return format (e.g., structure of namespace objects), pagination behavior, or error handling. For a read operation in a context with many sibling tools, more guidance is needed to ensure correct usage.

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 input schema fully documents all four parameters (search, owned, page, per_page). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, such as how 'owned' interacts with 'available to the current user'. 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 verb ('List') and resource ('namespaces available to the current user'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_namespace' (singular) or 'verify_namespace', which could cause confusion about when to use each.

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 like 'get_namespace' (for a single namespace) or 'verify_namespace'. It lacks context about prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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

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/harshmaur/gitlab-mcp'

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