arcade-azure-devops-mcp

AzureDevops_ListProjects

AzureDevops_ListProjects

Retrieve a paginated list of all projects in your Azure DevOps organization, with optional filtering by state and count.

Instructions

List all projects in the Azure DevOps organization.

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": "AzureDevops_ListProjects"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`top`	No	Maximum number of projects to return
`skip`	No	Number of projects to skip for pagination
`state_filter`	No	Filter projects by state: wellFormed, createPending, deleted, all

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 9, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

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 for behavioral disclosure. It simply states 'List all projects' but does not disclose pagination behavior (top/skip) or the ability to filter by state, nor does it mention that 'all' may be limited by these parameters. No information about read-only nature, return format, or authentication is provided.

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, short sentence with no unnecessary words. It is concise and front-loaded, clearly stating the primary action and scope.

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?

The tool is relatively simple with no required parameters and full schema coverage, so the description plus schema may be minimally sufficient. However, the description does not clarify that pagination parameters affect the 'all' claim, and with no output schema, the agent lacks information about the return structure. It is adequate but has clear gaps.

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 description coverage is 100%, with all three parameters (top, skip, state_filter) already described in the input schema. The description itself adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, 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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('projects') with clear scope ('in the Azure DevOps organization'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'AzureDevops_GetProject' (which fetches a single project) and other list tools (e.g., ListTeams, ListRepositories).

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. It does not mention that this is for enumerating projects, whereas GetProject is for a specific project, nor does it discuss any exclusions or preferred contexts.

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