testit-mcp-server

list_shared_step_references

Read-only

Lists work items and sections that reference a shared step, helping you trace usage and assess impact before editing or deleting it.

Instructions

Where a shared step is used: work items whose steps reference it, and sections (target).

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": "list_shared_step_references"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Shared step (work item) UUID.
`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.
`target`	No	Default workItems.
`orderBy`	No	Sort expression, e.g. "createdDate desc".
`searchField`	No	Field name to search in.
`searchValue`	No	Value to search for in searchField.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Nov 14, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds that results span two distinct domains (work item steps and sections), which is useful result-set context, but it says nothing about empty results, whether nested/indirect references are included, or how paging interacts with large reference sets.

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?

It is short with no filler, but the single sentence is a fragment with an awkward trailing parenthetical '(target)', so the key information is not cleanly front-loaded as an action statement. Brevity here edges toward under-specification rather than efficiency.

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?

This is a 9-parameter, paginated reverse-lookup tool with no output schema, so the description must carry more weight. It explains neither the shape of a returned reference nor how page/size/skip/take and the searchField/searchValue pair should be combined, leaving real gaps for correct invocation.

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 the baseline is 3: id, page/size/skip/take, target, orderBy, and the search pair are all documented in the schema. The description's only added meaning is pointing at 'target' as the selector between work items and sections, which the enum description already states.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description identifies the resource as a reverse lookup of where a shared step is referenced, naming the two kinds of results (work item steps and sections). However, it is phrased as a noun fragment rather than a verb+resource statement ('List the work items/sections that reference this shared step'), leaving the agent to infer that it is an enumeration operation distinct from get_shared_step.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, and no alternative is named. The only routing hint is the parenthetical '(target)', which merely echoes the schema enum rather than telling the agent when to pick workItems versus sections, or when to call get_shared_step instead.

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

Deploy Server