Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
GitLab MCP Server

GitLab MCP Server

by ttpears
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Restore Todo

restore_todo
Idempotent

Restores a previously completed GitLab to-do item to pending status using its numeric ID or full gid, so you can revisit tasks marked done by mistake.

Instructions

Restore a previously-marked-done to-do item back to pending state. Accepts the todo's ID (numeric or full gid://gitlab/Todo/N form).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
todoIdYesTodo ID — accepts a bare numeric ID ("42") or a full gid ("gid://gitlab/Todo/42")
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. Addedv1.19.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare the operation non-read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds useful detail about the exact state change and accepted ID formats, but it does not cover error behavior, permissions, or what happens if the item is already pending.

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?

Two short sentences front-load the core operation and then supply the ID format detail. There is no filler, and every sentence contributes to correct invocation.

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-parameter mutation tool with full schema coverage and annotations present, the description gives enough context to call it correctly. Minor gaps remain around return behavior and edge cases like restoring an already-pending todo, but these are not critical.

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 the todoId parameter is already fully documented in the schema, including both numeric and gid formats. The description repeats that information rather than adding new semantics, which fits the baseline of 3.

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 (restore) and resource (to-do item), and it precisely defines the state transition from done back to pending. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings such as mark_todo_done.

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 phrase 'previously-marked-done to-do item' establishes the condition for use, making it clear this applies only to completed items. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the inverse relationship to mark_todo_done is obvious.

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