Skip to main content
Glama
zereight

gitlab mcp

by zereight
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

list_issues

Read-only

List GitLab issues with optional filters for project, scope, state, labels, and more. Use it to retrieve paginated issue records for issue management and tracking.

Instructions

List issues (default: created by current user; use scope='all' for all). Use this for issue management: list GitLab issues, optionally scoped with project_id. Use get_issue when the issue iid is already known and my_issues for issues assigned to the current user. It is read-only and paginated, requires issue read permission, and returns issue records or GitLab errors for invalid identifiers, missing resources, or rate limits.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoPage number for pagination (default: 1)
scopeNoReturn issues from a specific scope
stateNoReturn issues with a specific state
labelsNoArray of label names
searchNoSearch for specific terms
due_dateNoReturn issues that have the due date
jmespathNoOptional JMESPath expression filtering the JSON result before return.
per_pageNoNumber of items per page (max: 100, default: 20)
author_idNoReturn issues created by the given user ID. Mutually exclusive with author_username.
milestoneNoMilestone title
issue_typeNoFilter to a given type of issue. One of issue, incident, test_case or task
project_idNoProject ID or URL-encoded path (optional - if not provided, lists issues across all accessible projects)
assignee_idNoReturn issues assigned to the given user ID (user id, none, or any). Mutually exclusive with assignee_username.
confidentialNoFilter confidential or public issues
iteration_idNoReturn issues assigned to the given iteration ID. None returns issues that do not belong to an iteration. Any returns issues that belong to an iteration.
created_afterNoReturn issues created after the given time
updated_afterNoReturn issues updated after the given time
created_beforeNoReturn issues created before the given time
updated_beforeNoReturn issues updated before the given time
author_usernameNoReturn issues created by the given username. Mutually exclusive with author_id.
assignee_usernameNoReturn issues assigned to the given username. Mutually exclusive with assignee_id.
with_labels_detailsNoReturn more details for each label

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. Changed4 schema fields changedv2.1.21
    • changedInput schema / properties / assignee_id / description
      Previous value: -"Return issues assigned to the given user ID. user id or none or any"New value: +"Return issues assigned to the given user ID (user id, none, or any). Mutually exclusive with assignee_username."
    • changedInput schema / properties / assignee_username / description
      Previous value: -"Return issues assigned to the given username"New value: +"Return issues assigned to the given username. Mutually exclusive with assignee_id."
    • changedInput schema / properties / author_id / description
      Previous value: -"Return issues created by the given user ID"New value: +"Return issues created by the given user ID. Mutually exclusive with author_username."
    • changedInput schema / properties / author_username / description
      Previous value: -"Return issues created by the given username"New value: +"Return issues created by the given username. Mutually exclusive with author_id."
  3. Addedv2.1.18
  4. Removedv2.1.14
  5. Addedv2.1.11
  6. Removedv2.1.10
  7. Changed1 schema field changedv2.1.9
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  8. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Even though annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true, the description adds meaningful behavioral context: it is paginated, requires issue read permission, and returns issue records or GitLab errors for invalid identifiers, missing resources, or rate limits. This goes beyond the annotation and helps the agent anticipate failure modes.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is three sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose, immediately covers the default behavior, then adds alternative routing and safety/error context in a tight structure.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a 22-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it lists, how scope works, when to use siblings, pagination, permissions, and expected return/error behavior. The rich schema fills in the remaining parameter details, so nothing critical is missing.

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 every parameter already has a meaningful description. The tool description adds only light semantic value by mentioning the default scope and optional project_id filtering, but it does not need to explain the many other parameters.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'List issues' and 'list GitLab issues, optionally scoped with project_id'. It also gives the default scope and explicitly distinguishes itself from get_issue and my_issues, so an agent can confidently select it over sibling 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?

Usage guidance is explicit: it says to use get_issue when the issue iid is already known and my_issues for issues assigned to the current user. It also clarifies the default behavior (created by current user) and how to broaden it with scope='all'.

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