gitlab-ci-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

gitlab_create_schedule

Create a new GitLab CI/CD schedule with cron, branch or tag, timezone, and variables to automate recurring pipeline runs.

Instructions

Create a new CI/CD schedule with the given cron and variables.

Not idempotent: duplicate calls create duplicate schedules with auto-incrementing IDs.

Examples: - "Schedule a nightly build on master at 02:00 Europe/Berlin" → description='Nightly build', cron='0 2 * * *', ref='master', timezone='Europe/Berlin', variables={'NIGHTLY': '1'} - Don't use to update existing schedules — use gitlab_update_schedule.

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": {
      "description": "<description>",
      "cron": "<cron>",
      "variables": "<variables>",
      "project_path": "<project_path>"
    },
    "name": "gitlab_create_schedule"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ref`	No	Branch or tag to run.	master
`cron`	Yes	Cron expression in 5 fields (e.g. '0 2 * * *').
`active`	No	Activate the schedule immediately.
`timezone`	No	IANA timezone for the cron (e.g. 'Europe/Berlin').	UTC
`variables`	Yes	CI variables to attach to the schedule (key -> value).
`description`	Yes	Human-readable description.
`project_path`	Yes	GitLab project path (e.g. 'my-org/my-repo'). Required by default. For legacy deployments only, set GITLAB_ALLOW_DEFAULT_PROJECT=true to use GITLAB_PROJECT_PATH when omitted.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ref`	No
`cron`	No
`active`	No
`status`	No
`description`	No
`schedule_id`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed6 schema fields changedv0.5.5Nov 5, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / project_path / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

removedInput schema / properties / project_path / default
```
Removed value: -null
```

changedInput schema / properties / project_path / description

Previous value: -"GitLab project path (e.g. 'my-org/my-repo'). When omitted, the default from GITLAB_PROJECT_PATH env var is used."New value: +"GitLab project path (e.g. 'my-org/my-repo'). Required by default. For legacy deployments only, set GITLAB_ALLOW_DEFAULT_PROJECT=true to use GITLAB_PROJECT_PATH when omitted."

addedInput schema / properties / project_path / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```
addedInput schema / properties / project_path / type
```
Added value: +"string"
```

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "description",
-  "cron",
-  "variables"
-]New value: +[
+  "description",
+  "cron",
+  "variables",
+  "project_path"
+]

First observedv0.5.1Apr 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=false and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds the consequence the annotation cannot: duplicate calls create duplicate schedules with auto-incrementing IDs. It does not cover authorization requirements or whether the new schedule is returned, but with annotations carrying the safety profile the remaining gap is modest.

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 non-idempotency warning is front-loaded and the exclusion line is placed after it, so the most consequential facts come first. The bulleted example earns its space by demonstrating a multi-field mapping, though it is the wordiest part of an otherwise tight definition.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be explained, and the mutation risk plus the update-vs-create split are both covered. The only meaningful omission is what permissions or token scopes GitLab requires to create a schedule, which is left implicit.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3; the worked example goes beyond the schema by showing that 'nightly build on master at 02:00 Europe/Berlin' decomposes into cron, ref, timezone and variables together, which clarifies how the fields interact. It does not add format detail the schema lacks (cron field count, IANA timezone name are already documented there).

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a new CI/CD schedule') plus the core inputs (cron, variables), which is enough to distinguish it from gitlab_list_schedules, gitlab_update_schedule and gitlab_trigger_pipeline. No tautology, no ambiguity.

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 names the exclusion case and the alternative: 'Don't use to update existing schedules — use gitlab_update_schedule.' It also flags the duplicate-creation hazard, which is the main misuse mode for a create tool, so an agent knows both what to use it for and what not to.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.