Skip to main content
Glama

gitlab_list_integrations

Retrieve all configured integrations/services for a specific GitLab project by providing its ID or URL-encoded path, enabling effective project management and workflow automation.

Instructions

List all available project integrations/services

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYesThe ID or URL-encoded path of the project

Implementation Reference

  • The primary handler function that implements the logic for the gitlab_list_integrations tool. It validates the project_id parameter and calls the integrationsManager to list integrations, then formats the response.
    export const listIntegrations: ToolHandler = async (params, context) => {
      const { project_id } = params.arguments || {};
      if (!project_id) {
        throw new McpError(ErrorCode.InvalidParams, 'project_id is required');
      }
      
      const data = await context.integrationsManager.listIntegrations(project_id as string | number);
      return formatResponse(data);
    };
  • The input schema definition for the gitlab_list_integrations tool, specifying the required project_id parameter.
    {
      name: 'gitlab_list_integrations',
      description: 'List all available project integrations/services',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          project_id: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'The ID or URL-encoded path of the project'
          }
        },
        required: ['project_id']
      }
    },
  • The registration entry in the tool registry that maps the tool name 'gitlab_list_integrations' to its handler function.
    gitlab_list_integrations: integrationHandlers.listIntegrations,
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states it's a list operation, implying read-only behavior, but doesn't mention authentication needs, rate limits, pagination, or the format of returned data. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that interacts with an external API.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 list tool with one well-documented parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, without annotations or output details, it lacks completeness regarding behavioral aspects like authentication or data format, which are important for API tools.

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 the single parameter 'project_id' well-documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific details beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline for high coverage without extra value.

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 clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('all available project integrations/services'), making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'gitlab_get_integration' (singular vs. plural), which would require a 5.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'gitlab_get_integration' for a specific integration, or prerequisites such as project access. It's a basic statement with no contextual usage information.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Related Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/rifqi96/mcp-gitlab'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server