ado-mcp

ado_run_pipeline

Queue a YAML pipeline run, optionally specifying branch, variables, or template parameters.

Instructions

Queue a run of a YAML pipeline, optionally on a branch and with variables/template parameters.

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": {
      "pipelineId": "<pipelineId>"
    },
    "name": "ado_run_pipeline"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`branch`	No	Branch to run against, e.g. "main"
`project`	No	Project name or ID (defaults to ADO_DEFAULT_PROJECT)
`variables`	No	Pipeline variables (name → value)
`pipelineId`	Yes	Pipeline ID
`templateParameters`	No	YAML template parameters

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 30, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Only states the action; does not disclose behavioral traits like async execution, permissions needed, error handling, or side effects.

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?

Single sentence, 16 words, front-loaded with key action. No superfluous information.

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?

No output schema; missing return value description (e.g., run ID). Adequate for a simple queue action but lacks detail on behavior like async status.

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%, so baseline is 3. Description adds marginal context by noting optionality of branch and variables/template parameters, but does not provide meaning beyond schema.

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?

Description clearly states the action ('Queue a run'), the resource ('YAML pipeline'), and optional parameters ('branch', 'variables/template parameters'). Distinguishes from sibling tools like ado_list_pipelines and ado_queue_build.

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?

Implied usage for YAML pipelines, but no explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives (e.g., ado_queue_build for classic builds). No when-not-to-use or exclusions.

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

Deploy Server