Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
gitlab-mcp

gitlab-mcp

by mcpland
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Get Pipeline Trigger Token

gitlab_get_pipeline_trigger
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve metadata for a GitLab pipeline trigger token without exposing the token value; use project and trigger IDs to inspect trigger details.

Instructions

Get one pipeline trigger token's metadata. The token value is never returned.

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": {
      "trigger_id": "<trigger_id>"
    },
    "name": "gitlab_get_pipeline_trigger"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idNo
trigger_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.7.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds a genuinely useful behavioral detail beyond them: the token value is never returned, which is important security context for an agent handling this resource.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and followed by the key return-value caveat. There is no unnecessary wording.

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 read-only lookup with annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential return-value restriction. However, it leaves both parameters undocumented in the description despite zero schema coverage, which is a meaningful gap for correct invocation.

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%, so the description needs to explain the parameters, but it never mentions trigger_id or project_id. The phrase 'one pipeline trigger token' only loosely implies trigger_id identifies the token, and project_id is completely unaddressed.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: retrieve a single pipeline trigger token's metadata. 'One' clearly distinguishes it from list/create/delete trigger siblings, though it does not name those alternatives explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus gitlab_list_pipeline_triggers or other trigger tools, and no prerequisites or context about when a specific trigger ID is available are given.

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