Skip to main content
Glama
GitLab MCP Server

GitLab MCP Server

by ttpears

Manage Pipeline

manage_pipeline

Retry or cancel a CI/CD pipeline in a GitLab project using the pipeline IID and authenticated write credentials.

Instructions

Retry or cancel a CI/CD pipeline (requires user authentication with write permissions)

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionYesAction to perform on the pipeline
pipelineIidYesPipeline IID
projectPathYesFull path of the project (e.g., "group/project-name")
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. Changed1 schema field changedv1.15.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / userCredentials / description
      Previous value: -"Your GitLab credentials (optional - uses shared token if not provided)"New value: +"Your GitLab credentials (optional — falls back to the configured env token if not provided)"
  3. First observedv1.7.3

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, non-idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful auth context (write permissions required), but does not explain the side effects of retry/cancel or what the response contains.

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?

A single sentence, front-loaded with the actions and resource, with a brief parenthetical auth note. There is no 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 two-action mutation with fully described parameters and safety annotations, the description covers purpose and authentication. It omits return/effect details, but with no output schema and annotations covering safety, this is a minor gap.

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%, so all four parameters are documented, including the action enum and credential fallback. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States specific actions (retry/cancel) and the resource (CI/CD pipeline). It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives, but the action set is distinct from read-only pipeline tools such as get_pipeline_jobs.

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?

Implies use when a pipeline needs retry or cancel and notes the write-auth requirement. It does not state when to choose retry versus cancel, when not to use the tool, or name alternatives.

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