Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
gitlab-mcp

gitlab-mcp

by mcpland
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Delete Pipeline

gitlab_delete_pipeline
Destructive

Permanently delete a GitLab pipeline and its job logs, artifacts, and test reports; this action is irreversible, so verify the pipeline ID first.

Instructions

Delete a pipeline and its job logs, artifacts, and test reports permanently. Irreversible. Requires pipeline_id. Recommended pre-check: gitlab_get_pipeline.

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": {
      "pipeline_id": "<pipeline_id>"
    },
    "name": "gitlab_delete_pipeline"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idNo
pipeline_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.7.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and idempotentHint=false, but the description goes further by naming exactly what is destroyed (job logs, artifacts, test reports) and stating 'Irreversible.' That blast-radius detail is not derivable from the annotations and is precisely what an agent needs before a destructive call.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and its destructiveness, then the required input, then the safety recommendation. No filler and nothing important buried.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers destruction scope, irreversibility, the required parameter, and a pre-check recommendation. The one meaningful gap is the unexplained project_id, which an agent must still resolve from context to make a valid call.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% and the description covers only one of the two parameters, noting pipeline_id is required. project_id is left completely unexplained in both the schema and the description, and no format or ID-scoping detail is added (e.g., that pipeline_id is a string, or how project context is resolved).

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a pipeline') plus the cascade scope ('its job logs, artifacts, and test reports'), which lets an agent distinguish this from sibling gitlab_get_pipeline. It does not explicitly contrast with gitlab_cancel_pipeline, the closest confusable operation, so it stops short of 5.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

'Requires pipeline_id' and 'Recommended pre-check: gitlab_get_pipeline' give concrete preconditions and a verification step before invoking. It offers no explicit when-not-to-use guidance (e.g., use cancel to stop a running pipeline instead of deleting its history), so it lacks the exclusions a 5 requires.

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