Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ttpears

GitLab MCP Server

by ttpears
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Get Work Item

get_work_item
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch a GitLab work item by numeric ID or global gid and return raw widgets so hierarchy, health, iteration, milestone, and dates stay visible.

Instructions

Fetch a GitLab work item (issue, task, epic, incident, OKR) by global ID. Returns the raw widgets array so epic hierarchy, health status, iteration, milestone, and dates are all visible. Accepts either a numeric id or a full gid (gid://gitlab/WorkItem/123).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesWork item ID — numeric (e.g. "123") or full gid (e.g. "gid://gitlab/WorkItem/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

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the read-only, idempotent, non-destructive profile, so the description earns credit for adding the return shape: the raw widgets array and which fields it exposes (epic hierarchy, health, iteration, milestone, dates). That is real behavioral context an agent cannot get from the annotations, though nothing is said about auth fallback or errors.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the action and identifier, then return shape, then accepted id formats. No filler and nothing buried.

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 no output schema, the description usefully explains what comes back (raw widgets) and for a 2-parameter read tool that is nearly sufficient. The only meaningful gap is routing guidance relative to sibling tools like list_work_items or get_issue_context.

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%, and the description only restates the numeric-or-gid format already documented in the `id` schema field. It adds no help beyond the schema for the optional credentials parameter, so baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Fetch a GitLab work item ... by global ID') and enumerates the concrete subtypes it covers (issue, task, epic, incident, OKR). This distinguishes it from the many sibling list/search tools that also return issue-like data.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The 'by global ID' framing implies single-item lookup versus the list_work_items / get_issues / search_issues siblings, but the description never explicitly says when to use this instead of them or what prerequisites apply. Usage is inferred rather than stated.

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