Skip to main content
Glama
zereight

gitlab mcp

by zereight
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get_project

Read-only

Fetch details for a specific GitLab project using its numeric ID or URL-encoded path. Use when you need project metadata, visibility, or settings.

Instructions

Get details of a specific project. To find resources, use the matching list or search tool. Read-only; missing resources, denied access, and rate limits return errors. project_id/group_id take a numeric ID or URL-encoded path.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
jmespathNoOptional JMESPath expression filtering the JSON result before return.
project_idYesProject ID or URL-encoded path

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. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.1.9
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / required
      Added value: +[
+  "project_id"
+]
  7. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description's "Read-only" is partly redundant. It nonetheless adds genuine behavioral context the annotations don't carry: missing resources, denied access, and rate limits all surface as errors. Minor wart: it references `group_id`, which is not a parameter of this tool.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with purpose before routing and error behavior. Nothing is padded, though the group_id clause is dead weight that dilutes an otherwise tight definition.

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 two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the definition covers purpose, routing, error modes, and ID format expectations. It does not describe the returned project shape or what jmespath does to the result, but the schema carries the parameter detail.

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% and the project_id description already says "Project ID or URL-encoded path," so the description's restatement adds no new meaning. It ignores the `jmespath` parameter entirely and mentions a nonexistent `group_id`, which can only confuse rather than inform.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ("Get details of a specific project"), which is clearly distinct from siblings like list_projects or get_issue. It does not explicitly name list_projects as the counterpart, but the resource scope is unambiguous.

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?

"To find resources, use the matching list or search tool" routes the agent away from this tool when discovery is the goal, which is real usage guidance. However, the alternative is described generically rather than by name (list_projects/search_repositories), and no when-not conditions beyond discovery are given.

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