Skip to main content
Glama
danielealbano

mcp-for-azure-devops-boards

azdo_query_work_items

Filter Azure DevOps work items by project, area, iteration, state, tags, assignee, and date ranges. Retrieve matching items with customizable criteria.

Instructions

Query work items by filters

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectYesAzDO project name
area_pathNoArea path to filter by (e.g., "MyProject\\Team1"). Uses UNDER operator to include child paths.
exclude_tagsNoTags to exclude (e.g., ["wontfix"])
include_tagsNoTags to include (e.g., ["bug", "critical"])
organizationYesAzDO org name
exclude_stateNoStates to exclude (e.g., ["Closed", "Removed"])
include_stateNoStates to include (e.g., ["Active", "Resolved"])
iteration_pathNoIteration path to filter by (e.g., "MyProject\\Sprint 1"). Uses UNDER operator to include child paths.
changed_date_toNoFilter by changed date (to). Format: YYYY-MM-DD or YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SSZ
created_date_toNoFilter by creation date (to). Format: YYYY-MM-DD or YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SSZ
changed_date_fromNoFilter by changed date (from). Format: YYYY-MM-DD or YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SSZ
created_date_fromNoFilter by creation date (from). Format: YYYY-MM-DD or YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SSZ
exclude_board_rowNoBoard rows/swimlanes to exclude
include_board_rowNoBoard rows/swimlanes to include (e.g., ["General", "Scraping Platform"])
exclude_changed_byNoChanged by users to exclude
include_changed_byNoChanged by users to include (e.g., ["John Doe", "jane@example.com"])
exclude_assigned_toNoAssignees to exclude
include_assigned_toNoAssignees to include (e.g., ["John Doe", "jane@example.com"])
exclude_board_columnNoBoard columns to exclude
include_board_columnNoBoard columns to include (e.g., ["Active", "Resolved"])
state_change_date_toNoFilter by state change date (to). Format: YYYY-MM-DD or YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SSZ
exclude_work_item_typeNoWork item types to exclude
include_work_item_typeNoWork item types to include (e.g., ["Bug", "User Story"])
state_change_date_fromNoFilter by state change date (from). Format: YYYY-MM-DD or YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SSZ
include_latest_n_commentsNoInclude the latest N comments (optional). Set to -1 for all comments.
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry full burden. Description only says 'Query', implying read operation but does not explicitly state read-only nature, side effects, permissions, or rate limits. No behavioral traits disclosed beyond the verb.

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?

Extremely short at 4 words, which is concise but lacks structure. No front-loading of critical information. Adequate for a simple tool but could benefit from more details in a structured format.

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 25 parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. No mention of return format, pagination, or behavior when no filters are applied. The tool is complex but description is minimal, leaving agents unprepared.

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 baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what is already in the schema parameters. No credit for extra context.

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?

Description clearly states verb (query) and resource (work items) with method (by filters). However, it does not distinguish from siblings like azdo_get_work_items or azdo_query_work_items_by_wiql, which have overlapping functionality. A 4 is appropriate as purpose is clear but lacks differentiation.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like azdo_query_work_items_by_wiql or azdo_get_work_items. No explicit context for usage, prerequisites, or exclusions. This is a significant gap given the array of sibling tools.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/danielealbano/mcp-for-azure-devops-boards'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server