Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

ALM X++ MCP Server

by io.github.alimbenhelal-pro
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

find_similar_implementations

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find D365 objects structurally similar to the one you supply (same kind, similar method set, similar field set). Useful when you need a working reference implementation to copy from.

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": {
      "objectName": "<objectName>"
    },
    "name": "find_similar_implementations"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
maxResultsNoMaximum results (default: 15, max: 30)
objectNameYesObject name to find similar objects for, e.g. 'ALMERSftpConnectionTable', 'SalesTable'
filterAotTypeNoOptional: filter to a specific AOT type, e.g. 'AxTable', 'AxClass'. If not set, uses the same type as the source object.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the read-only, idempotent, non-destructive safety profile. The description adds useful behavioral context by defining what 'structurally similar' means (same kind, similar method set, similar field set), which goes beyond the tool name and helps an agent predict behavior.

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?

Two concise sentences: the first states the core behavior and similarity criteria, the second states the primary use case. Every word earns its place with no fluff or repetition of schema content.

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

Completeness4/5

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

The description is adequate for a read-only, list-returning tool with annotations covering safety and a self-explanatory schema. It does not describe the return format (e.g., list of object names), but given the tool name and 'find ... objects' wording, an agent can infer the output shape. Minor gap: no explicit mention of result ordering or default scoping.

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%, so the input schema already documents all three parameters. The description does not add parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides, which is acceptable under the baseline of 3.

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 clearly identifies the verb (Find), the resource (D365 objects), and the distinguishing behavior (structurally similar, same kind, similar method set, similar field set). This differentiates it from sibling search/find tools like search_d365_code or find_references, which are text- or reference-based.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives a clear when-to-use trigger: 'when you need a working reference implementation to copy from.' It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, but the use case is specific enough to guide an agent.

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