Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Azure DevOps MCP Server with PAT Authentication

Azure DevOps MCP Server with PAT Authentication

by ennuiii
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

testplan_list_test_cases

Retrieve a list of test cases from a specific test plan and suite in Azure DevOps. Input project ID, plan ID, and suite ID to access relevant test cases for streamlined test management.

Instructions

Gets a list of test cases in the test plan.

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>",
      "planid": "<planid>",
      "suiteid": "<suiteid>"
    },
    "name": "testplan_list_test_cases"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
planidYesThe ID of the test plan.
projectYesThe unique identifier (ID or name) of the Azure DevOps project.
suiteidYesThe ID of the test suite.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states it 'Gets a list,' implying a read-only operation, but doesn't specify permissions required, pagination behavior, rate limits, or what happens if parameters are invalid. This leaves significant gaps for a tool with three required parameters.

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized for its function, earning a high score for conciseness.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (3 required parameters) and lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain return values, error conditions, or behavioral details, making it inadequate for an agent to use the tool effectively without additional context.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, with clear descriptions for 'planid', 'project', and 'suiteid'. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or constraints, so it meets the baseline score of 3.

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 states the verb ('Gets') and resource ('list of test cases in the test plan'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from its sibling 'testplan_list_test_plans' or other list tools, missing specific differentiation that would warrant a score of 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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'testplan_list_test_plans' or other test-related tools. It lacks context about prerequisites, such as needing an existing test plan and suite, or any exclusions, leaving usage unclear.

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

Related Tools