Skip to main content
Glama

ado_get_work_item

Retrieve a specific Azure DevOps work item by its ID to access task details, status updates, or comprehensive field information for project tracking and management.

Instructions

Obtiene un Work Item de Azure DevOps por su ID

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesEl ID del Work Item
fullNoSi es true, devuelve todos los campos

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function for the ado_get_work_item tool, which fetches a work item from Azure DevOps using the Work Item Tracking API.
    async ({ id, full }) => {
      const api = await getWitApi();
      const expand = full
        ? witInterfaces.WorkItemExpand.All
        : witInterfaces.WorkItemExpand.Fields;
      const workItem = await api.getWorkItem(id, undefined, undefined, expand);
    
      if (!workItem) {
        throw new Error(`Work Item con ID ${id} no encontrado`);
      }
    
      const result = full
        ? JSON.stringify(workItem, null, 2)
        : formatWorkItem(workItem);
    
      return {
        content: [{ type: "text", text: result }],
      };
  • src/index.ts:225-234 (registration)
    The registration of the ado_get_work_item tool with the MCP server, including its schema definition.
    server.tool(
      "ado_get_work_item",
      "Obtiene un Work Item de Azure DevOps por su ID",
      {
        id: z.number().describe("El ID del Work Item"),
        full: z
          .boolean()
          .optional()
          .describe("Si es true, devuelve todos los campos"),
      },
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'Obtiene' (Gets) implies a read operation, it doesn't specify authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or what happens when the ID doesn't exist. For a read operation tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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, efficient sentence that states the core purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool and gets straight to the point.

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?

For a read operation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what data is returned, in what format, or any constraints on the retrieval. Given the lack of structured metadata, the description should provide more context about the operation's behavior and results.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents both parameters thoroughly. The description doesn't add any additional semantic context about the parameters beyond what's in the schema. The baseline score of 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('Obtiene' - Gets) and resource ('un Work Item de Azure DevOps'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this from sibling tools like 'ado_query_wiql' or 'ado_get_attachments' which also retrieve work item-related data, so it doesn't achieve full sibling differentiation.

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. There are multiple sibling tools for retrieving work item data (ado_query_wiql, ado_get_attachments, ado_get_comments), but the description doesn't indicate this is specifically for retrieving a single work item by ID versus other query methods.

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/soulberto/mcp-azure'

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