GitFlic MCP Server

gitflic_mr_by_commit

Read-only

Locate merge requests that contain a specific commit hash, and optionally filter by status (opened, merged, closed, canceled, or failed) to narrow results.

Instructions

Find MR(s) containing a specific commit hash. Optionally filter by status.

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": "<project>",
      "hash": "<hash>"
    },
    "name": "gitflic_mr_by_commit"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`raw`	No	Return the full, un-slimmed GitFlic response for THIS call (no token compression). Use when the default slim view dropped a field you need.
`hash`	Yes
`fields`	No	Return only these top-level fields (plus id keys), narrowing the response further.
`status`	No
`project`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.5.1Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing behavioural beyond the purpose: it does not say whether multiple MRs can be returned, whether all statuses are searched by default, or how empty results appear.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and no filler. The terse style is efficient, though the second sentence is thin enough that it borders on under-specification.

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 read-only lookup with five parameters and no output schema, the description does not say what is returned (the MR record or records) or what the default status scope is. It is enough to attempt a call, but an agent would have gaps about the result shape and the meaning of the 'project' parameter.

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 40%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that 'hash' means a commit hash and that 'status' is an optional filter, but it says nothing about the required 'project' parameter. The raw/fields parameters are documented only by the schema itself.

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 names a specific verb and resource: 'Find MR(s) containing a specific commit hash'. That is clearly distinct from siblings like gitflic_mr_list, gitflic_mr_view or gitflic_commit_get. It does not explicitly name an alternative, which keeps it from a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The only usage guidance is 'Optionally filter by status', which describes an option rather than when to choose this tool. There is no mention of when to prefer gitflic_mr_list or gitflic_mr_view, and no prerequisites or exclusions 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