ado-mcp

ado_create_wiki_page

Create a wiki page in Azure DevOps by providing a wiki ID, page path, and markdown content.

Instructions

Create a wiki page at a path with markdown content.

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": {
      "wikiId": "<wikiId>",
      "path": "<path>",
      "content": "<content>"
    },
    "name": "ado_create_wiki_page"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`path`	Yes	Page path, e.g. "/Home" or "/Docs/Setup"
`wikiId`	Yes	Wiki ID or name
`content`	Yes	Markdown content
`project`	No	Project name or ID (defaults to ADO_DEFAULT_PROJECT)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 30, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations are empty, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action without explaining side effects like whether the operation overwrites an existing page, requires specific permissions, or returns the created entity. This is minimal for a creation tool.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single sentence that is direct and to the point, with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized, though it could benefit from a slightly more structured format (e.g., listing required prerequisites).

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 output schema and the description is brief, it lacks completeness regarding return values, error scenarios, and preconditions (like needing an existing wiki). This is insufficient for an AI agent to use reliably without further documentation.

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 100% with each parameter already described in the schema. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly specifies the action ('Create') and the resource ('a wiki page'), with additional context of 'at a path with markdown content'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ado_get_wiki_page (read), ado_update_wiki_page (update), and ado_delete_wiki_page (delete).

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when a wiki must already exist (via ado_create_wiki) or when to use the update tool. The description lacks any conditional usage advice.

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

Deploy Server