Skip to main content
Glama

get_wikis

Retrieve all wikis from an Azure DevOps project to access documentation and knowledge resources for development workflows.

Instructions

Gets all wikis in a project.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectYesThe name or ID of the project.

Implementation Reference

  • Core handler implementing the get_wikis tool logic by calling the Azure DevOps wiki_client to retrieve all wikis for the given project.
    def get_wikis(self, project):
        return self.wiki_client.get_all_wikis(project=project)
  • MCP server dispatch handler for get_wikis tool that invokes the client method and formats the wiki list into a standardized response.
    elif name == "get_wikis":
        wikis = self.client.get_wikis(**arguments)
        return [
            {
                "id": wiki.id,
                "name": wiki.name,
                "url": wiki.url,
                "remote_url": wiki.remote_url,
            }
            for wiki in wikis
        ]
  • Schema definition for the get_wikis tool, specifying the required 'project' input parameter.
    types.Tool(
        name="get_wikis",
        description="Gets all wikis in a project.",
        inputSchema={
            "type": "object",
            "properties": {
                "project": {
                    "type": "string", 
                    "description": "The name or ID of the project."
                },
            },
            "required": ["project"],
            "additionalProperties": False
        }
    ),
  • Registration handler that exposes the list of tools including get_wikis via MCP list_tools protocol.
    @self.server.list_tools()
    async def list_tools() -> List[types.Tool]:
        """Return the list of available tools."""
        logger.info(f"Tools requested - returning {len(self.tools)} tools")
        self.tools_registered = True
        return self.tools
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states a read operation ('Gets'), implying it's non-destructive, but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, pagination, or return format. This is inadequate for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded and wastes no space, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'wikis' entail (e.g., metadata, content), how results are returned, or error conditions, leaving significant gaps for a tool with no structured behavioral data.

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?

The description adds no parameter information beyond the input schema, which has 100% coverage. It doesn't clarify semantics like what constitutes a valid project name/ID or how wikis are defined. With high schema coverage, 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.

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the action ('Gets') and resource ('all wikis in a project'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'list_all_wikis_in_organization' or 'list_wiki_pages', which reduces specificity.

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 doesn't mention sibling tools like 'list_all_wikis_in_organization' for organization-wide wikis or 'list_wiki_pages' for pages within a wiki, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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/xrmghost/mcp-azure-devops'

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