Skip to main content
Glama

Interactive Release Create

gitlab_interactive_release_create

Create a GitLab release with step-by-step prompts, requiring explicit confirmation before API call. Ideal for human-in-the-loop publishing, abortable at any stage.

Instructions

Create a GitLab release through step-by-step prompts, with explicit confirmation before calling the GitLab API. Cancellation at any prompt aborts without creating the release.

After invocation, the tool elicits in order:

  • tag_name (string, required) — must reference an existing tag in the project; create it first via gitlab_tag (action='create').

  • name (string, optional) — release title; defaults to tag_name when left empty.

  • description (string, optional, multi-line, Markdown) — release notes; leave empty to skip.

  • confirm (boolean, required) — final yes/no review of the assembled summary.

When to use: human-in-the-loop release publishing. NOT for: CI/automated release creation — use gitlab_release (action='create') with all fields pre-supplied.

Requires the MCP client to support the elicitation capability. If unsupported, returns a structured error naming gitlab_release (action='create') as the alternative.

Behavior: each successful invocation publishes ONE new release after explicit user confirmation. NON-idempotent — re-running with the same tag returns 409 (release already exists). Cancellation/decline at any prompt aborts with no GitLab API call and no side effects. Side effects on success: GitLab fires release-created webhooks and may notify release subscribers.

Returns: JSON with the created release (tag_name, name, description, web_url).

See also: gitlab_release, gitlab_tag.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYesProject ID or URL-encoded path where the release will be created

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
next_stepsNo
tag_nameYes
nameYes
descriptionYes
description_htmlNo
created_atYes
released_atYes
authorNo
commit_shaNo
upcoming_releaseNo
milestonesNo
commit_pathNo
tag_pathNo
assets_countNo
assets_sourcesNo
assets_linksNo
evidencesNo
web_urlNo
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations provide destructiveHint and openWorldHint only. The description adds non-idempotence (409 on duplicate), side effects (webhooks, notifications), cancellation behavior, and confirmation step. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Well-structured with bullet points and sections. Front-loaded with main purpose and confirmation. Every sentence adds value, no redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's interactive complexity, the description covers flow, prerequisites, cancellation, side effects, return value, and alternatives. Output schema exists so return description is optional but still provided succinctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema has 1 parameter (project_id) with 100% coverage. The description explains interactive elicitation parameters (tag_name, name, description, confirm) not in schema, adding crucial meaning for the interactive flow beyond what schema provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it creates a GitLab release via step-by-step prompts with confirmation. It distinguishes from siblings by naming gitlab_release for automated use and gitlab_tag for creating tags first.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly says when to use (human-in-the-loop) and when not (CI/automated), providing alternative gitlab_release. Also notes requirement for MCP client elicitation support and gives alternative if unsupported.

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/jmrplens/gitlab-mcp-server'

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