Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

ALM X++ MCP Server

by io.github.alimbenhelal-pro
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

erp_call

Destructive

WHEN: to run one ERP MCP tool on ONE Dynamics 365 F&O instance, as the signed-in user (their own F&O roles and legal entities apply). Get the tool name and argument schema from erp_list_tools first. On protected instances (PROD) any tool that is not flagged read-only needs confirm=true, and you must only set it after the user explicitly approved the exact action. On a readOnly instance every tool that can change data is refused and confirm does not override it. To compare two instances, call erp_call once per instance with the same read-only tool and diff the results.

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": {
      "instance": "<instance>",
      "tool": "<tool>"
    },
    "name": "erp_call"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toolYesExact tool name from erp_list_tools.
confirmNoRequired true to run a non read-only tool on a protected instance.
instanceYesInstance alias from erp_list_instances.
argumentsNoJSON object with the tool arguments, as a string. Omit or "{}" when none.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses that tools run as the signed-in user with their F&O roles and legal entities, that protected instances require confirm=true only after explicit user approval, and that readOnly instances refuse data-changing tools with confirm unable to override. These are important behavioral and safety details.

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 front-loaded with a WHEN clause and is organized into prerequisite, safety, readOnly, and comparison guidance. Every sentence contributes necessary operational context without unnecessary repetition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity as a dispatcher with destructive and open-world annotations, the description covers prerequisites, authentication context, confirm requirements, readOnly restrictions, and comparison usage. No output schema exists, and the description provides enough for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful semantics for confirm beyond the schema, clarifying that it must only be set after explicit user approval and cannot override readOnly instance restrictions.

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 states a specific verb and resource: run one ERP MCP tool on one Dynamics 365 F&O instance. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not differentiate itself from the sibling erp_read tool, so it falls short of a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explicitly states when to use the tool, the prerequisite of getting the tool name and schema from erp_list_tools first, and the conditions for protected and readOnly instances. It also describes the two-instance comparison workflow, leaving little ambiguity.

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

All ALM X++ MCP Server toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources