gitlab mcp

get_project

Read-only

Retrieve details for a specific GitLab project using its ID or URL-encoded path, with optional JMESPath filtering to narrow the returned JSON.

Instructions

Get details of a specific project. To find resources, use the matching list or search tool.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "project_id": "<project_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_project"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`jmespath`	No	Optional JMESPath expression filtering the JSON result before return.
`project_id`	Yes	Project ID or URL-encoded path

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv2.1.66Sep 23, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / jmespath

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional JMESPath expression filtering the JSON result before return.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

Addedv2.1.18May 30, 2026
Removedv2.1.14May 22, 2026
Addedv2.1.11May 13, 2026
Removedv2.1.10May 9, 2026
Changed2 schema fields changedv2.1.9May 9, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
- addedInput schema / required
```
Added value: +[
+  "project_id"
+]
```
First observedv1.0.0Jan 2, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that—it does not describe what 'details' includes, permission requirements, or any special handling like URL-encoded paths.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is two concise sentences with the core purpose front-loaded. The second sentence adds useful routing context without unnecessary verbosity.

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?

For a simple two-parameter retrieval tool with annotations covering safety, the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not explain what project details are returned or how JMESPath filtering affects the response, leaving some contextual gaps.

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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters (project_id and jmespath) are fully documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Get details of a specific project'), making the tool's purpose clear. It does not fully distinguish itself from sibling retrieval tools like list_projects, but the routing sentence helps clarify its role.

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?

It explicitly directs the agent to use a matching list or search tool when trying to find resources, implying this tool is for retrieving a known project. This gives clear usage context, though it does not name a specific sibling or state when not to use this tool.

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