Skip to main content
Glama
zereight

gitlab mcp

by zereight
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get_merge_request

Read-only

Retrieve detailed information about a specific GitLab merge request using project ID and either merge request IID or source branch. Optionally include deployment, commit, and approval summaries.

Instructions

Get details of a merge request (mergeRequestIid or branchName required). Set include_summaries=true for deployment/commit/approval summaries. Use this for a known resource or result; choose the corresponding list or search tool when you need to discover multiple resources. It is read-only and does not mutate GitLab data; missing resources, invalid identifiers, insufficient permission, and rate limits are returned as errors. When project_id or group_id is accepted, provide the numeric ID or complete URL-encoded path described by the schema; use required identifiers and pagination fields exactly as documented.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
jmespathNoOptional JMESPath expression filtering the JSON result before return.
project_idYesProject ID or complete URL-encoded path to project
source_branchNoSource branch name
include_summariesNoIf true, include deployment_summary, commit_addition_summary and approval_summary (extra API calls, larger response). Default false to reduce token usage.
merge_request_iidNoThe IID of a merge request

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.1.66
    • addedInput schema / properties / jmespath
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional JMESPath expression filtering the JSON result before return.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv2.1.30
    • addedInput schema / properties / include_summaries
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "If true, include deployment_summary, commit_addition_summary and approval_summary (extra API calls, larger response). Default false to reduce token usage.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  3. Addedv2.1.18
  4. Removedv2.1.14
  5. Addedv2.1.11
  6. Removedv2.1.10
  7. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.1.9
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / required
      Added value: +[
+  "project_id"
+]
  8. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, so the statement 'does not mutate GitLab data' is redundant. However, the description adds valuable behavioral details about error conditions (missing resources, invalid identifiers, insufficient permission, rate limits) and notes that include_summaries triggers extra API calls and a larger response. These go beyond the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with purpose but includes extraneous details like the 'When project_id or group_id is accepted' sentence, which is not applicable to this tool since only project_id exists. It is somewhat rambling and could be trimmed, but the core information is present.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The description covers read-only behavior, error handling, and include_summaries effects, but the parameter inaccuracies (branchName vs source_branch, group_id) create gaps and potential confusion. Without an output schema, the description could also mention the general return shape, but overall it is adequate for a single-resource get tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description introduces inaccuracies: it says 'mergeRequestIid or branchName required' while the schema has merge_request_iid and source_branch, and neither is required (only project_id is). It also references 'group_id' which is not in this tool's schema. This misleads the agent about parameter semantics.

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 fetches details of a single merge request and distinguishes it from list/search tools by saying 'Use this for a known resource or result; choose the corresponding list or search tool when you need to discover multiple resources.' The verb and resource are specific, and the mention of include_summaries adds functional clarity.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly tells when to use this tool (known resource/result) versus list/search alternatives. It also clarifies when include_summaries is beneficial, and notes that identifiers must be provided exactly as documented. This is strong, actionable guidance.

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