Skip to main content
Glama
zereight

gitlab mcp

by zereight
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

verify_namespace

Read-only

Check whether a GitLab namespace path exists. Use parent_id to disambiguate nested namespaces that share the same path under different parents.

Instructions

Verify if a namespace path exists. Use parent_id to scope the check to a specific parent namespace — required for nested namespaces where the same path may exist under different parents.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYesNamespace path to verify
jmespathNoOptional JMESPath expression filtering the JSON result before return.
parent_idNoParent namespace ID; required to correctly resolve paths in nested namespaces where the same path may exist under different parents

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. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.1.62
    • addedInput schema / properties / parent_id / maximum
      Added value: +9007199254740991
    • addedInput schema / properties / parent_id / minimum
      Added value: +-9007199254740991
  3. Changed1 schema field changedv2.1.25
    • addedInput schema / properties / parent_id
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Parent namespace ID; required to correctly resolve paths in nested namespaces where the same path may exist under different parents",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  4. Addedv2.1.18
  5. Removedv2.1.14
  6. Addedv2.1.11
  7. Removedv2.1.10
  8. Changed1 schema field changedv2.1.9
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  9. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the read-only safety profile is covered. The description adds the nested-parent resolution behavior, but it does not disclose what the tool returns or how it behaves when the path does not exist.

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 two sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded and the parent_id guidance is relevant, necessary context.

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 simple existence check with complete schema coverage and read-only annotations, the description covers the essential edge case. It could be more explicit about the return format, but 'verify if exists' sufficiently implies the intended behavior.

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 all parameters are already documented. The description mostly restates the parent_id rationale already provided in the schema rather than adding genuinely new semantic meaning.

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 clearly identifies the action and resource: 'Verify if a namespace path exists.' It also adds meaningful context about parent_id scoping. It does not explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling namespace tools like get_namespace or list_namespaces, but the verification purpose is clear.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives useful guidance on when parent_id is required, specifically for nested namespaces where the same path can exist under different parents. However, it does not explain when to choose this tool over alternatives or when not to use it.

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