Skip to main content
Glama
zereight

gitlab mcp

by zereight
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get_merge_request_version

Read-only

Retrieve a specific merge request diff version by project, MR IID, and version ID. Use when you need the exact patch or change set for a known merge request version.

Instructions

Get a specific version of a merge request. 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
unidiffNoPresent diffs in the unified diff format. Default is false. Introduced in GitLab 16.5.
jmespathNoOptional JMESPath expression filtering the JSON result before return.
project_idYesProject ID or complete URL-encoded path to project
version_idYesThe ID of the merge request diff version
merge_request_iidYesThe internal ID of the 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. Addedv2.1.18
  3. Removedv2.1.14
  4. Addedv2.1.11
  5. Removedv2.1.10
  6. Addedv2.1.9

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, and the description reinforces this by stating it does not mutate GitLab data. It also adds useful error-behavior context for missing resources, invalid identifiers, insufficient permissions, and rate limits, which goes beyond the annotation.

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 short and front-loaded with purpose, which is good. However, the final sentence contains generic boilerplate about group_id and pagination fields that are not present in this schema, reducing precision and making the description slightly less disciplined than it could be.

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 single-resource read-only getter, the description covers purpose, usage boundaries, safety, and error behavior. It does not describe the response contents, but given the simple resource model and the absence of an output schema, the description is still sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds little beyond restating the path-encoding rule for project_id and includes boilerplate mentions of group_id and pagination fields that do not actually apply to this tool's schema.

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 starts with a specific verb and resource: 'Get a specific version of a merge request.' It also clarifies the intended scope by contrasting with list/search tools for discovery, which helps distinguish this tool from siblings like list_merge_request_versions.

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 description explicitly says to use this tool for a known resource/result and directs the agent to a list/search tool when discovery is needed. It gives clear when-to-use guidance, though it does not name the exact sibling tool like list_merge_request_versions.

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