Skip to main content
Glama
zereight

gitlab mcp

by zereight
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

list_issue_note_emoji_reactions

Read-only

Retrieve all emoji reactions on a specific issue note or discussion reply. Provide project ID, issue IID, and note ID, plus discussion ID for thread replies to see the full list of reactions.

Instructions

List all emoji reactions on an issue note. Pass discussion_id for discussion thread replies. Use this for a collection of resources; choose the corresponding get tool when you already know the single resource to inspect. 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
note_idYesThe ID of a note (comment or thread reply)
jmespathNoOptional JMESPath expression filtering the JSON result before return.
issue_iidYesThe IID of an issue
project_idYesProject ID or complete URL-encoded path to project
discussion_idNoThe ID of a discussion thread. Required for notes that are discussion replies; omit for top-level notes.

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

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces this by saying the tool 'is read-only and does not mutate GitLab data.' It additionally discloses error behavior for missing resources, invalid identifiers, insufficient permissions, and rate limits, which adds value 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.

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is only four sentences and front-loads the core purpose first. It is appropriately concise, though the final generic sentence about project_id/group_id and pagination is not specific to this tool and adds minor noise.

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 straightforward read-only list tool with all parameters schema-documented, the description is largely complete. It covers collection-vs-single use, discussion_id handling, and error behavior, though it does not describe the expected return payload since no output schema is present.

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 baseline is 3 and the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds discussion_id context already present in the schema, but also includes a boilerplate note about group_id which is not a parameter in this schema, reducing its added value.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List all emoji reactions on an issue note.' It also distinguishes a collection use case from a single-resource get tool, clearly separating it from sibling list/get tools.

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 says to pass discussion_id for discussion thread replies and directs the agent to 'choose the corresponding get tool when you already know the single resource to inspect.' This gives concrete when-to-use versus alternative 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