Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@wanadev/mcp-gitlab

@wanadev/mcp-gitlab

by wanadev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

list_groups

Read-only

Lists accessible GitLab groups to retrieve group IDs by name, enabling further operations on those groups.

Instructions

Lister les groupes GitLab accessibles. IMPORTANT : appelez ce tool en premier quand l'utilisateur mentionne un groupe par son nom, pour obtenir le group_id (ID ou full_path) a passer aux autres tools.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_groups"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
searchNoRecherche textuelle dans le nom du groupe
top_level_onlyNoNe retourner que les groupes de premier niveau

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.8.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true. Description adds value by noting the tool should be called first to retrieve group IDs, which is behavioral context beyond the annotation. No contradictions.

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 concise sentences with no fluff. The purpose and usage are front-loaded effectively.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple list tool with optional filters, the description explains the key behavior (returns group_id/full_path) and when to use. No output schema is needed given the simplicity.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions (search, top_level_only). The description does not add further parameter details, so 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 clearly states the tool lists accessible GitLab groups and provides a specific use case: call this first when a user mentions a group by name to obtain group_id. This distinguishes it from sibling list_* 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?

Explicitly states when to use (when user mentions a group by name) and that it's a prerequisite for other tools. Could also state when not to use (e.g., if group_id already known), but the guidance is clear and actionable.

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