Skip to main content
Glama
nikydobrev

Azure DevOps Multi-Organization MCP Server

by nikydobrev

pipelines_get_build_status

Retrieve the current status of a specific Azure DevOps pipeline build to monitor progress, identify failures, or check completion across multiple organizations.

Instructions

Gets the status report for a build

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
organizationYesThe name of the Azure DevOps organization
projectYesProject ID or name to get the build status for
buildIdYesID of the build to get the status for

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function that gets the connection, retrieves the Build API, fetches the build report for the specified project and build ID, and returns the JSON stringified build status.
    async ({ organization, project, buildId }) => {
        const connection = await connectionManager.getConnection(organization);
        const buildApi = await connection.getBuildApi();
        const build = await buildApi.getBuildReport(project, buildId);
        return {
            content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(build, null, 2) }],
        };
    }
  • Zod schema defining the input parameters: organization, project, and buildId.
    {
        organization: z.string().describe("The name of the Azure DevOps organization"),
        project: z.string().describe("Project ID or name to get the build status for"),
        buildId: z.number().describe("ID of the build to get the status for"),
    },
  • Registration of the 'pipelines_get_build_status' tool with McpServer, including name, description, input schema, and handler function.
    server.tool(
      "pipelines_get_build_status",
      "Gets the status report for a build",
      {
          organization: z.string().describe("The name of the Azure DevOps organization"),
          project: z.string().describe("Project ID or name to get the build status for"),
          buildId: z.number().describe("ID of the build to get the status for"),
      },
      async ({ organization, project, buildId }) => {
          const connection = await connectionManager.getConnection(organization);
          const buildApi = await connection.getBuildApi();
          const build = await buildApi.getBuildReport(project, buildId);
          return {
              content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(build, null, 2) }],
          };
      }
    );
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states it 'Gets the status report', implying a read-only operation without details on authentication needs, rate limits, error handling, or what the status report includes. It lacks behavioral context crucial for a tool with no output schema.

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, direct sentence with no wasted words, making it highly concise and front-loaded. It efficiently communicates the core action without unnecessary elaboration.

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 has no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain what the status report contains, how it differs from other build-related tools, or any behavioral traits, leaving significant gaps for an agent to use it effectively in 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%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying it retrieves status for a specific build, which aligns with the schema but doesn't enhance understanding of parameter usage or interactions.

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 action ('Gets') and resource ('status report for a build'), making the purpose understandable. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'pipelines_get_builds' or 'pipelines_get_build_log', which also retrieve build-related information, so it lacks specificity in distinguishing its exact scope.

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, such as 'pipelines_get_builds' for listing builds or 'pipelines_get_build_log' for logs. It also omits prerequisites or context for usage, leaving the agent to infer based on parameter names alone.

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/nikydobrev/mcp-server-azure-devops-multi'

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