testit-mcp-server

get_work_item_test_results_history

Read-only

Retrieve a work item's test results history across test runs and plans, newest first, and filter by dates, statuses, runs, plans, or configurations.

Instructions

Test results of a work item across test runs/plans (newest first), with optional filters.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "get_work_item_test_results_history"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Work item UUID.
`to`	No	ISO date-time upper bound.
`from`	No	ISO date-time lower bound.
`page`	No	1-based page number; alternative to skip. Uses "size" (default 50).
`size`	No	Page size for "page"; alias of take.
`skip`	No	Number of items to skip (offset).
`take`	No	Max number of items to return.
`orderBy`	No	Sort expression, e.g. "createdDate desc".
`testRunIds`	No
`searchField`	No	Field name to search in.
`searchValue`	No	Value to search for in searchField.
`statusCodes`	No
`testPlanIds`	No
`configurationIds`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Nov 14, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuinely useful behavioral fact — results are returned newest first — but says nothing about pagination defaults, filter combination semantics, or result volume for a potentially large cross-run dataset.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the ordering guarantee is stated compactly. Nothing is redundant or buried.

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 14 parameters, no output schema, and 71% schema coverage, a one-sentence description is too thin: it does not clarify how filters interact, what the default result window is, or how this differs from the many sibling result/history tools.

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 71%, so the baseline is 3, and the description adds nothing beyond 'optional filters'. It does not explain the date bounds, the page/skip/take aliasing, the orderBy expression syntax, or the searchField/searchValue pairing that the schema only partially documents; the four array parameters (testRunIds, statusCodes, testPlanIds, configurationIds) have no descriptions anywhere.

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?

Names a specific verb-less but concrete resource: test results of a work item, spanning test runs/plans. That distinguishes it from get_work_item_history (change history) and get_test_run_results, though the description never explicitly contrasts with those siblings.

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?

Only 'with optional filters' hints at usage; there is no statement of when to prefer this over get_work_item_history, get_test_run_results, or search_test_results, 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