Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to Gitlab MCP Server

Related Servers

  • A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    A
    maintenance
    Full-coverage GitLab MCP server with 44 tools across 18 resource types. Agent-optimized CQRS design — one tool call handles complete multi-step operations. Supports OAuth 2.1, read-only mode, stdio/SSE/StreamableHTTP transports, and GraphQL-native work items with full hierarchy (epics,issues,etc)
    1,922 npm
    6
    Apache 2.0
  • A
    license
    B
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    A Model Context Protocol server that enables AI assistants to interact with self-hosted GitLab instances through 30 specialized tools. It supports managing projects, merge requests, CI/CD pipelines, and repository operations via the GitLab REST API v4.
    30
    MIT
  • A
    license
    C
    quality
    A
    maintenance
    A production-ready MCP server for GitLab enabling AI assistants to read and manage GitLab projects, merge requests, issues, pipelines, wikis, releases, and more through a unified interface.
    100
    233 npm
    10
    MIT
  • A
    license
    B
    quality
    C
    maintenance
    A Model Context Protocol (MCP) server for GitLab and Jira integration. This server allows AI agents like gemini-cli to interact with your GitLab and Jira instances.
    32
    8 npm
    11
    MIT
  • A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    A Model Context Protocol server for GitLab integration, enabling AI assistants to manage projects, merge requests, pipelines, issues, releases, and more.
    MIT
  • -
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    Not graded
    maintenance
    A Model Context Protocol server that enables AI assistants to interact with GitLab repositories, allowing tasks like managing merge requests, searching projects, and creating comments through RESTful API integration.
    19 npm
    2
    -

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Scored across 2 tools

Disambiguation5/5

gitlab_execute_action and gitlab_find_action have clearly distinct roles: one executes catalog actions, the other searches the local catalog without making API calls. There is no meaningful overlap or ambiguity between them.

Naming Consistency5/5

Both tools follow the same gitlab_<verb>_action pattern, creating a predictable and consistent naming convention. The verb prefixes accurately indicate the operation type.

Tool Count3/5

Two tools is a minimal surface and feels thin for a GitLab server, even though the find/execute split is functional. The generic executor and catalog search reduce the impact, but the count is still borderline.

Completeness5/5

The two tools form a complete discovery-and-execution loop: find_action provides schemas, hints, and examples, while execute_action runs the selected action. Assuming the underlying catalog covers the needed GitLab operations, there are no obvious dead ends.

Maintenance

ActivityActive
ResponsivenessResponsive