Skip to main content
Glama
ttpears

GitLab MCP Server

by ttpears

Delete Note

delete_note
DestructiveIdempotent

Delete a comment on a GitLab issue or merge request by note ID; requires the note author's or a maintainer's token.

Instructions

Delete a comment (note) on a GitLab issue or merge request. Requires a user token belonging to the note author or a maintainer.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
noteIdYesNote ID — either the bare numeric ID or the full GraphQL gid (gid://gitlab/Note/123)
userCredentialsNoYour GitLab credentials (optional — falls back to the configured env token if not provided)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv4.0.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • changedInput schema / properties / userCredentials / anyOf
      Previous value: -[
      -  {
      -    "additionalProperties": false,
      -    "properties": {
      -      "accessToken": {
      -        "minLength": 1,
      -        "type": "string"
      -      },
      -      "gitlabUrl": {
      -        "format": "uri",
      -        "type": "string"
      -      }
      -    },
      -    "type": "object"
      -  },
      -  {
      -    "type": "null"
      -  }
      -]New value: +[
      +  {
      +    "properties": {
      +      "accessToken": {
      +        "minLength": 1,
      +        "type": "string"
      +      },
      +      "gitlabUrl": {
      +        "format": "uri",
      +        "type": "string"
      +      }
      +    },
      +    "type": "object"
      +  },
      +  {
      +    "type": "null"
      +  }
      +]
  2. Addedv1.15.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is largely covered. The description adds useful permission context by stating the token must belong to the note author or a maintainer, though it does not discuss permanence or cascading effects.

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 two sentences, front-loads the core action, and uses the second sentence for an important auth constraint. There is no redundant or wasted text.

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 simple destructive delete tool with full schema coverage and annotations covering destructiveness and idempotency, the description is nearly complete. It could mention irreversibility or error behavior for unauthorized tokens, but those gaps are minor given the structured metadata.

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 coverage is 100%, and the schema fully documents noteId and userCredentials. The description only restates the credential requirement at a high level and adds no syntax or format details beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Delete a comment (note) on a GitLab issue or merge request.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools such as create_note, update_note, get_notes, and other delete_* tools.

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?

The description provides clear context for use and an explicit prerequisite: the token must belong to the note author or a maintainer. It does not explicitly compare against update_note or state when not to delete, but the context is clear and has no misleading exclusions.

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