Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
gitlab-mcp

gitlab-mcp

by mcpland
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Get Pipeline Test Report

gitlab_get_pipeline_test_report
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a GitLab pipeline's unit test report with totals and per-suite cases, including status, timing, and stack traces; filter by test case status to focus on failures or errors.

Instructions

Get the unit test report for a pipeline: totals plus each suite's test cases with status, timing, and stack traces. Pass test_case_status (for example ["failed","error"]) to keep only matching cases.

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_get_pipeline_test_report"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idNo
pipeline_idYes
test_case_statusNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.7.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description earns credit by describing the returned content in detail (totals plus each suite's cases with status, timing, stack traces), which matters because no output schema exists. It does not mention permissions, rate limits, or payload size for stack traces, keeping it below a 5.

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?

Two sentences with zero waste — the return shape comes first, the filtering tip second, and an inline example removes ambiguity about the array format. Nothing is repeated from the schema or annotations.

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 read-only tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema, describing the return contents and the filter behavior covers most of what an agent needs. What is missing is any guidance on the relationship to the _summary sibling and on the identity parameters, which the agent must infer.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden; it does explain test_case_status with a concrete example (["failed","error"]) and its keep-only-matching semantics. However, project_id and pipeline_id get no explanation at all, leaving two of three parameters undocumented.

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 ('Get the unit test report for a pipeline') and enumerates the payload: totals, per-suite test cases, status, timing, stack traces. This clearly separates it from generic pipeline getters like gitlab_get_pipeline, but it never mentions the near-twin sibling gitlab_get_pipeline_test_report_summary, so the agent must guess which of the two report tools to pick.

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?

Usage is only implied by the payload description; there is no explicit statement of when to call this versus the _summary variant or other pipeline tools. The one actionable instruction given — pass test_case_status to 'keep only matching cases' — is a filtering hint rather than call-routing guidance.

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