ado-mcp

ado_list_release_definitions

Read-only

List classic release definitions in an Azure DevOps project. Filter by name or limit results to find relevant release pipelines.

Instructions

List classic release definitions in a project.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "ado_list_release_definitions"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`top`	No	Max results to return
`project`	No	Project name or ID (defaults to ADO_DEFAULT_PROJECT)
`searchText`	No	Filter by name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 30, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only (readOnlyHint=true). The description adds the nuance that it lists 'classic' release definitions, which is helpful. However, it does not disclose other behaviors like authentication requirements, rate limits, or the format of the response.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is highly efficient and to the point.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's low complexity (3 optional parameters, no output schema) and the presence of readOnlyHint, the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not specify the return format, which would be helpful for an agent. For a simple list operation, this is acceptable but not complete.

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%, meaning all parameters have descriptions in the input schema. The description does not add any additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 states the verb 'List', the resource 'classic release definitions', and the scope 'in a project'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'ado_get_release_definition' (single item) and 'ado_list_releases' (releases, not definitions).

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions or when-not-to-use. The usage context is implied by the tool name and sibling context, but the description itself lacks direction.

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

Deploy Server