Skip to main content
Glama
Tiberriver256

Azure DevOps MCP Server

by Tiberriver256
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

list_work_items

List work items in an Azure DevOps project. Supports filtering via WIQL or saved queries, pagination, and custom field selection.

Instructions

List work items in a project

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
topNoMaximum number of work items to return
skipNoNumber of work items to skip
wiqlNoWork Item Query Language (WIQL) query
fieldsNoList of additional fields to include in the response beyond the defaults (System.Id, System.Title, System.State, System.AssignedTo). Use full field reference names, e.g. "Microsoft.VSTS.Scheduling.StoryPoints", "System.IterationPath", "System.AreaPath".
teamIdNoThe ID of the team
queryIdNoID of a saved work item query
projectIdNoThe ID or name of the project (Default: MyProject)
organizationIdNoThe ID or name of the organization (Default: mycompany)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.6
    • addedInput schema / properties / fields
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "List of additional fields to include in the response beyond the defaults (System.Id, System.Title, System.State, System.AssignedTo). Use full field reference names, e.g. \"Microsoft.VSTS.Scheduling.StoryPoints\", \"System.IterationPath\", \"System.AreaPath\".",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
  2. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.0.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / organizationId
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The ID or name of the organization (Default: mycompany)",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / projectId / description
      Previous value: -"The ID or name of the project"New value: +"The ID or name of the project (Default: MyProject)"
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "projectId"
-]
  3. First observed

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral-disclosure burden. It does not state that this is a read-only operation, does not mention pagination via top/skip, does not explain WIQL behavior or default project/organization handling, and does not describe response shape.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. However, for an 8-parameter listing tool with no output schema, it is too minimal to be considered appropriately sized.

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

Completeness2/5

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

With no annotations, no output schema, and 8 parameters, the description is not complete enough for correct invocation. It omits pagination semantics, query modes (WIQL vs saved query), default project/organization behavior, and what fields are returned by default.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with clear parameter descriptions for top, skip, wiql, fields, teamId, queryId, projectId, and organizationId. The tool description adds no parameter meaning beyond restating that work items are in a project, so the schema does all the work.

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 states a clear verb ('List') and resource ('work items') scoped to a project. It does not distinguish itself from sibling tools such as search_work_items, but the basic purpose 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 Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus search_work_items or other work-item tools. The only usage hint is the implicit project scope from the phrase 'in a project'.

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