)

Replaces $top and $skip with top and skip not to break some clients

## GitHub issue number
[317](#317)
## **Associated Risks**
N/A

## ✅ **PR Checklist**

- [X] **I have read the [contribution
guidelines](https://github.com/microsoft/azure-devops-mcp/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md)**
- [X] **I have read the [code of conduct
guidelines](https://github.com/microsoft/azure-devops-mcp/blob/main/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md)**
- [X] Title of the pull request is clear and informative.
- [X] 👌 Code hygiene
- [N/A] 🔭 Telemetry added, updated, or N/A
- [N/A] 📄 Documentation added, updated, or N/A
- [N/A] 🛡️ Automated tests added, or N/A

## 🧪 **How did you test it?**
successfully made calls to the search MCP in Claude code, Copilot, Cline
and Roo

…ts (#316)

Removing `wit_close_and_link_workitem_duplicates`. This is no longer
needed and the scenario can be accomplished using work item link and
work item updates.

## GitHub issue number
N/A

## **Associated Risks**

Low: Existing customers could be used to using the tool

## ✅ **PR Checklist**

- [x] **I have read the [contribution
guidelines](https://github.com/microsoft/azure-devops-mcp/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md)**
- [x] **I have read the [code of conduct
guidelines](https://github.com/microsoft/azure-devops-mcp/blob/main/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md)**
- [ ] Title of the pull request is clear and informative.
- [x] 👌 Code hygiene
- [x] 🔭 Telemetry added, updated, or N/A
- [x] 📄 Documentation added, updated, or N/A
- [x] 🛡️ Automated tests added, or N/A

## 🧪 **How did you test it?**

Tested process manually. Updated tests

Bumps [jest](https://github.com/jestjs/jest/tree/HEAD/packages/jest)
from 30.0.4 to 30.0.5.
<details>
<summary>Changelog</summary>
<p><em>Sourced from <a
href="https://github.com/%3Ca%20href="https://github.com/jestjs/jest/blob/main/CHANGELOG.md">jest's">https://github.com/jestjs/jest/blob/main/CHANGELOG.md">jest's
changelog</a>.</em></p>
<blockquote>
<h2>30.0.5</h2>
<h3>Features</h3>
<ul>
<li><code>[jest-config]</code> Allow <code>testMatch</code> to take a
string value</li>
<li><code>[jest-worker]</code> Let <code>workerIdleMemoryLimit</code>
accept 0 to always restart worker child processes</li>
</ul>
<h3>Fixes</h3>
<ul>
<li><code>[expect]</code> Fix <code>bigint</code> error (<a
href="https://github.com/%3Ca%20href="https://redirect.github.com/jestjs/jest/pull/15702">#15702</a>)</li">https://redirect.github.com/jestjs/jest/pull/15702">#15702</a>)</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
</details>
<details>
<summary>Commits</summary>
<ul>
<li><a
href="https://github.com/%3Ca%20href="https://github.com/jestjs/jest/commit/22236cf58b66039f81893537c90dee290bab427f"><code>22236cf</code></a">https://github.com/jestjs/jest/commit/22236cf58b66039f81893537c90dee290bab427f"><code>22236cf</code></a>
v30.0.5</li>
<li>See full diff in <a
href="https://github.com/%3Ca%20href="https://github.com/jestjs/jest/commits/v30.0.5/packages/jest">compare">https://github.com/jestjs/jest/commits/v30.0.5/packages/jest">compare
view</a></li>
</ul>
</details>
<br />


[![Dependabot compatibility
score](https://dependabot-badges.githubapp.com/badges/compatibility_score?dependency-name=jest&package-manager=npm_and_yarn&previous-version=30.0.4&new-version=30.0.5)](https://docs.github.com/en/github/managing-security-vulnerabilities/about-dependabot-security-updates#about-compatibility-scores)

Dependabot will resolve any conflicts with this PR as long as you don't
alter it yourself. You can also trigger a rebase manually by commenting
`@dependabot rebase`.

[//]: # (dependabot-automerge-start)
[//]: # (dependabot-automerge-end)

---

<details>
<summary>Dependabot commands and options</summary>
<br />

You can trigger Dependabot actions by commenting on this PR:
- `@dependabot rebase` will rebase this PR
- `@dependabot recreate` will recreate this PR, overwriting any edits
that have been made to it
- `@dependabot merge` will merge this PR after your CI passes on it
- `@dependabot squash and merge` will squash and merge this PR after
your CI passes on it
- `@dependabot cancel merge` will cancel a previously requested merge
and block automerging
- `@dependabot reopen` will reopen this PR if it is closed
- `@dependabot close` will close this PR and stop Dependabot recreating
it. You can achieve the same result by closing it manually
- `@dependabot show <dependency name> ignore conditions` will show all
of the ignore conditions of the specified dependency
- `@dependabot ignore this major version` will close this PR and stop
Dependabot creating any more for this major version (unless you reopen
the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
- `@dependabot ignore this minor version` will close this PR and stop
Dependabot creating any more for this minor version (unless you reopen
the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
- `@dependabot ignore this dependency` will close this PR and stop
Dependabot creating any more for this dependency (unless you reopen the
PR or upgrade to it yourself)


</details>

Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Dan Hellem <[email protected]>

Added instructions and link to video on using Cursor

## GitHub issue number #298 

## **Associated Risks**

None

## ✅ **PR Checklist**

- [x] **I have read the [contribution
guidelines](https://github.com/microsoft/azure-devops-mcp/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md)**
- [x] **I have read the [code of conduct
guidelines](https://github.com/microsoft/azure-devops-mcp/blob/main/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md)**
- [x] Title of the pull request is clear and informative.
- [x] 👌 Code hygiene
- [x] 🔭 Telemetry added, updated, or N/A
- [x] 📄 Documentation added, updated, or N/A
- [x] 🛡️ Automated tests added, or N/A

## 🧪 **How did you test it?**

None

---------

Co-authored-by: Engin Polat <[email protected]>

Hey,

i added the **create_pull_request_thread** functionality to initiate a
new comment thread on a pull request.

## GitHub issue number
#231

## **Associated Risks**

/

## ✅ **PR Checklist**

- [x] **I have read the [contribution
guidelines](https://github.com/microsoft/azure-devops-mcp/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md)**
- [x] **I have read the [code of conduct
guidelines](https://github.com/microsoft/azure-devops-mcp/blob/main/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md)**
- [x] Title of the pull request is clear and informative.
- [x] 👌 Code hygiene
- [x] 🔭 Telemetry added, updated, or N/A
- [x] 📄 Documentation added, updated, or N/A
- [x] 🛡️ Automated tests added, or N/A

## 🧪 **How did you test it?**
Model: Claude Sonnet 4
Prompt:
```
## Code Review Expert: Detailed Analysis and Best Practices

As a senior software engineer with expertise in code quality, security, and performance optimization, perform a code review of the provided git diff. 

Focus on delivering actionable feedback in the following areas:

Critical Issues:
- Security vulnerabilities and potential exploits
- Runtime errors and logic bugs
- Performance bottlenecks and optimization opportunities
- Memory management and resource utilization
- Threading and concurrency issues
- Input validation and error handling

Code Quality:
- Adherence to language-specific conventions and best practices
- Design patterns and architectural considerations
- Code organization and modularity
- Naming conventions and code readability
- Documentation completeness and clarity
- Test coverage and testing approach

Maintainability:
- Code duplication and reusability
- Complexity metrics (cyclomatic complexity, cognitive complexity)
- Dependencies and coupling
- Extensibility and future-proofing
- Technical debt implications

Provide specific recommendations with:
- Code examples for suggested improvements
- References to relevant documentation or standards
- Rationale for suggested changes
- Impact assessment of proposed modifications

Format your review using clear sections and bullet points. Include inline code references where applicable.

Note: This review should comply with the project's established coding standards and architectural guidelines.

### Context:
- **DevOps-Project**: z
- **Repository**: y
- **PR number**: x

### Instructions:
1. **Use Azure DevOps integration**:
   - Connect to Azure DevOps via MCP Tools
   - Load PR details, commits and existing comments
   - Analyze the changed files and code diffs

2 **Code standards check against**:
   - Copilot Instructions

3. **Sarcastic review style**:
   - Be precise but biting in criticism
   - Repeat similar issues for multiple files
   - Create separate comment threads for each issue
   - If possible, always link the file in the comment as well as the line and offset

4. **Azure DevOps Actions**:
   - Use `mcp_ado_repo_create_pull_request_thread` for new comments
   - Create specific comment threads with file/line references (for the line and offset: rightFileStartLine, rightFileStartOffset, rightFileEndLine, rightFileEndOffset)
   - Link specific lines of code and offsets
   - Set review priority based on issue severity

5. **Extra information**:
   - Ignore deleted comments
   - Ignore deleted files
   - Always perform a review, even if you think the PR has already been reviewed. Please proceed in such a way that you ignore the old review and start again.
   - PullRequest-Status Enum(NotSet = 0, Active = 1, Abandoned = 2, Completed = 3, All = 4)
   - Only look at the diffs from the PullRequest

6. **Qualtity**:
   1. **Specify filePath** - Full path to the file
   2. **Specify rightFileStartLine** - Start line of the problem
   3. **Specify rightFileEndLine** - End line of the problem
   4. **Specify rightFileStartOffset** - Start offset
   5. **Specify rightFileEndOffset** - End offset

### Expected result:
- Each comment with specific file/line reference
- Sarcastic but constructive tone
- Specific recommendations for improvement
- create new short review comments with specific line references
- Reviewing the diffs between the source branch and target branch
```
<img width="1396" height="851" alt="grafik"
src="https://github.com/%3Ca%20href="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/8aaec603-b890-4a6c-8d04-399a9cc4da18">https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/8aaec603-b890-4a6c-8d04-399a9cc4da18"
/>

---------

Co-authored-by: Dan Hellem <[email protected]>

This PR implements trimmed responses for Azure DevOps MCP server tools
to dramatically reduce LLM token consumption while maintaining backward
compatibility.

## Problem

The MCP server tools were returning full REST API JSON payloads, causing
unnecessary token burn and making it difficult for weaker LLMs to
extract relevant information. For example:

- `ado_resolve_comment` was returning 4200+ character responses when a
simple "resolved" message would suffice
- `ado_list_pull_request_threads` was returning verbose payloads with
`_links` objects, deleted comments, and unnecessary author properties

## Solution

Added a `fullResponse` parameter (defaults to `false`) to key repository
tools that provides two response modes:

### Trimmed Mode (Default)
- **Action tools** (`resolve_comment`, `reply_to_comment`) return simple
success messages
- **List tools** (`list_pull_request_threads`,
`list_pull_request_thread_comments`) return filtered data excluding:
  - Deleted comments
  - `_links` objects 
  - Verbose author properties (imageUrl, descriptor, url)

### Full Mode (Opt-in)
- Set `fullResponse: true` to get complete REST API responses for
debugging or advanced use cases

## Token Savings

Real-world examples show dramatic improvements:

- **resolve_comment**: 97.3% reduction (1346 → 37 characters)
- **reply_to_comment**: 92.5% reduction (549 → 41 characters)  
- **list_pull_request_threads**: 55.3% reduction (680 → 304 characters)

## Example Usage

```typescript
// Trimmed response (default)
await server.request({
  method: "tools/call",
  params: {
    name: "repo_resolve_comment",
    arguments: { repositoryId: "repo1", pullRequestId: 123, threadId: 456 }
  }
});
// Returns: "Thread 456 was successfully resolved."

// Full response (opt-in)
await server.request({
  method: "tools/call", 
  params: {
    name: "repo_resolve_comment",
    arguments: { 
      repositoryId: "repo1", 
      pullRequestId: 123, 
      threadId: 456,
      fullResponse: true 
    }
  }
});
// Returns: Complete thread JSON with all properties
```

## Modified Tools

- `repo_resolve_comment` - Simple success message vs full thread JSON
- `repo_reply_to_comment` - Simple success message vs full comment JSON
- `repo_list_pull_request_threads` - Filtered thread data vs complete
response
- `repo_list_pull_request_thread_comments` - Filtered comment data vs
complete response

All changes maintain full backward compatibility via the optional
`fullResponse` parameter.

Fixes #36.

<!-- START COPILOT CODING AGENT TIPS -->
---

💡 You can make Copilot smarter by setting up custom instructions,
customizing its development environment and configuring Model Context
Protocol (MCP) servers. Learn more [Copilot coding agent
tips](https://gh.io/copilot-coding-agent-tips) in the docs.

---------

Co-authored-by: copilot-swe-agent[bot] <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: nikolapeja6 <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Nikola Pejic <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Dan Hellem <[email protected]>

#326)

This pull request refactors the handling of work item update operations
in `src/tools/workitems.ts` and enhances the corresponding test coverage
in `test/src/tools/workitems.test.ts`. Key changes include simplifying
the transformation of operation strings, removing redundant code, and
adding tests for edge cases like API failures, operation
transformations, and Markdown formatting.

### Refactoring and simplification:

* Removed the `operationToApiString` utility function and replaced it
with an inline transformation using `zod` schemas to convert operation
strings to lowercase and validate them against allowed values (`add`,
`replace`, `remove`) (`src/tools/workitems.ts`,
[[1]](diffhunk://#diff-86312c74c8d340f1b252bb6a34ae3d610c400cf9151d45223ec54d2d2ab2b0c9L9-L21)
[[2]](diffhunk://#diff-86312c74c8d340f1b252bb6a34ae3d610c400cf9151d45223ec54d2d2ab2b0c9L466-R461).
* Simplified the mapping of update operations by directly using the
transformed `op` values instead of calling the removed utility function
(`src/tools/workitems.ts`,
[src/tools/workitems.tsL480-R475](diffhunk://#diff-86312c74c8d340f1b252bb6a34ae3d610c400cf9151d45223ec54d2d2ab2b0c9L480-R475)).

### Enhanced test coverage:

* Added a test case to ensure proper error handling when the API fetch
call fails, verifying that an appropriate error message is thrown
(`test/src/tools/workitems.test.ts`,
[test/src/tools/workitems.test.tsR430-R456](diffhunk://#diff-81b8c1c7196cc4eba4c6b2a30eaec7c3101f72c5a88803d07b942b71e3404b9dR430-R456)).
* Extended tests to validate the transformation of uppercase operation
strings (e.g., `Add`, `Replace`) to lowercase and their correct usage in
API calls (`test/src/tools/workitems.test.ts`,
[test/src/tools/workitems.test.tsL608-R653](diffhunk://#diff-81b8c1c7196cc4eba4c6b2a30eaec7c3101f72c5a88803d07b942b71e3404b9dL608-R653)).
* Introduced a test to verify that updates are grouped by work item ID
when batching API requests (`test/src/tools/workitems.test.ts`,
[test/src/tools/workitems.test.tsR975-R1060](diffhunk://#diff-81b8c1c7196cc4eba4c6b2a30eaec7c3101f72c5a88803d07b942b71e3404b9dR975-R1060)).
* Added a test to ensure that long text fields are correctly formatted
as Markdown when specified, including verifying the addition of a
`multilineFieldsFormat` entry in the API request body
(`test/src/tools/workitems.test.ts`,
[test/src/tools/workitems.test.tsR975-R1060](diffhunk://#diff-81b8c1c7196cc4eba4c6b2a30eaec7c3101f72c5a88803d07b942b71e3404b9dR975-R1060)).

Fixes #323

## GitHub issue number #323 

## **Associated Risks**

No risks

## ✅ **PR Checklist**

- [x] **I have read the [contribution
guidelines](https://github.com/microsoft/azure-devops-mcp/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md)**
- [x] **I have read the [code of conduct
guidelines](https://github.com/microsoft/azure-devops-mcp/blob/main/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md)**
- [x] Title of the pull request is clear and informative.
- [x] 👌 Code hygiene
- [x] 🔭 Telemetry added, updated, or N/A
- [x] 📄 Documentation added, updated, or N/A
- [x] 🛡️ Automated tests added, or N/A

## 🧪 **How did you test it?**

Updated auto tests. Verified the tools works manually and updated cases
on operations to account for uppper, lower, and combo

new release with recent fixes