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

gitlab-mcp-server

by kopiloto
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

list_group_projects

Retrieve all projects belonging to a specified GitLab group using its ID or path.

Instructions

List all projects within a specific GitLab group.

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": {
      "group_id": "<group_id>"
    },
    "name": "list_group_projects"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
group_idYesThe group ID or path
per_pageNoNumber of projects to return (max 100)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states the action without disclosing behavioral traits such as pagination behavior, authentication requirements, or error handling. It carries the full burden but falls short.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single concise sentence with no fluff. While efficient, it could benefit from slightly more context, but it earns a high score for being front-loaded and to the point.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple 2-parameter tool, the description is adequate but missing context about pagination (though per_page parameter exists) and return format. An output schema is absent, so more description would help.

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 clear parameter descriptions. The tool description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema; baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'List all projects within a specific GitLab group', specifying verb (list) and resource (projects) with scope (within a specific group). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like list_projects and list_groups.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage for listing projects under a group but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_projects, nor any prerequisites or context.

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