ado_query_items

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states 'Query existing work items,' which implies a read-only operation, but it does not disclose result format, pagination, default limit behavior beyond the schema, authentication needs, or any side effects. This is minimal disclosure for a tool with no annotation safety net.

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

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

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that names the action, object, and scope. It is concise and contains no filler or redundant information.

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

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

The tool is simple, with only optional parameters and no nested objects, but the lack of an output schema means the description should mention what is returned. It does not, leaving the return shape unspecified. The description is adequate but not fully complete for a query tool with no output schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with all three parameters ('type', 'limit', 'state') fully documented in the input schema, including enums, defaults, and constraints. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but given the high schema coverage, that is acceptable.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses the specific verb 'Query' and names the resource 'existing work items' in 'the active Azure DevOps project,' making the tool's purpose unmistakable. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like ado_create_items, ado_update_item, and ado_delete_item.

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

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

The description implies usage for retrieving existing work items, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or include any exclusions. No alternative tools or when-not-to-use conditions are mentioned, though the verb 'Query' gives a reasonable implicit signal.

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