Skip to main content
Glama
ttpears

GitLab MCP Server

by ttpears

Get Broadcast Message

get_broadcast_message
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves a specific GitLab broadcast message by its identifier.

Instructions

Get a specific GitLab broadcast message by ID.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesBroadcast message ID
userCredentialsNoYour GitLab credentials (optional — falls back to the configured env token if not provided)

Implementation Reference

  • The tool definition and handler for 'get_broadcast_message'. It accepts a broadcast message ID, resolves credentials, and delegates to client.getBroadcastMessage().
    const getBroadcastMessageTool: Tool = {
      name: 'get_broadcast_message',
      title: 'Get Broadcast Message',
      description: 'Get a specific GitLab broadcast message by ID.',
      requiresAuth: false,
      requiresWrite: false,
      annotations: { readOnlyHint: true, destructiveHint: false, idempotentHint: true },
      inputSchema: withUserAuth(z.object({
        id: z.number().int().describe('Broadcast message ID'),
      })),
      handler: async (input, client, userConfig) => {
        const credentials = input.userCredentials ? validateUserConfig(input.userCredentials) : userConfig;
        return client.getBroadcastMessage(input.id, credentials);
      },
    };
  • Input schema: requires a numeric 'id' field for the broadcast message ID.
    inputSchema: withUserAuth(z.object({
      id: z.number().int().describe('Broadcast message ID'),
    })),
  • src/tools.ts:2272-2300 (registration)
    Tool registered in the readOnlyTools array, which is spread into the exported tools array.
    export const readOnlyTools: Tool[] = [
      getProjectTool,
      getIssuesTool,
      getMergeRequestsTool,
      executeCustomQueryTool,
      getAvailableQueriesTools,
      getMergeRequestPipelinesTool,
      getPipelineJobsTool,
      getMergeRequestDiffsTool,
      getMergeRequestCommitsTool,
      getNotesTool,
      getIssueContextTool,
      getMergeRequestContextTool,
      listMilestonesTool,
      listIterationsTool,
      getTimeTrackingTool,
      getMergeRequestReviewersTool,
      getProjectStatisticsTool,
      listBroadcastMessagesTool,
      getBroadcastMessageTool,
      getWorkItemTool,
      listWorkItemsTool,
      listUserEventsTool,
      listProjectEventsTool,
      listMyEventsTool,
      analyticsUserSummaryTool,
      analyticsGroupSummaryTool,
      analyticsReviewBottlenecksTool,
    ];
  • Client helper that performs the actual REST API call to GitLab's GET /broadcast_messages/:id endpoint via the restRequest method.
    async getBroadcastMessage(id: number, userConfig?: UserConfig): Promise<any> {
      return this.restRequest('GET', `/broadcast_messages/${id}`, { userConfig });
    }
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, covering safety. The description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., response format, authentication). No contradiction.

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?

Single sentence, no unnecessary words. Efficiently communicates the tool's purpose.

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?

Given no output schema, the description could mention the return type (the broadcast message object). However, the tool is simple and the name implies what is returned. Annotations cover safety, so it's mostly complete.

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% with both parameters described. The description doesn't add extra meaning beyond the schema; it just restates the id parameter as 'Broadcast message ID'. Baseline score is appropriate.

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 'Get a specific GitLab broadcast message by ID' clearly states the verb (Get), resource (broadcast message), and specificity (by ID). It distinguishes from siblings like list_broadcast_messages which lists all messages.

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 implies when to use (when you need a single message by ID) but does not explicitly mention when not to use or provide alternatives. The sibling context helps but isn't stated.

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

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/ttpears/gitlab-mcp'

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