ALM X++ MCP Server

plan_and_execute

Destructive

CHAIN-OF-TOOLS PLANNER -- Execute a multi-step JSON plan in ONE call by chaining tools. Pass an EXPLICIT JSON array of steps (NL parsing disabled to prevent ambiguity). Maximum 5 steps per plan. The chain stops on any critical failure (ado_analyze_workitem, get_object_details).

Required Format (JSON array)

[{"tool":"get_object_details","args":{"objectName":"SalesTable"}},{"tool":"validate_best_practices","args":{"objectName":"SalesTable"}}]

When to use

You already know the exact sequence of 2-5 tool calls needed
The output of step N is independent of step N+1 (or matches the carried context: analysis_output)
You want SSE progress events between steps

When NOT to use

Single tool call (use the tool directly)
Plan depends on the user's intermediate decision (call tools one at a time)
More than 5 steps (split into separate calls)

Cost: $0 -- pure in-process execution.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`goal`	Yes	Natural language goal OR a JSON array of explicit steps. Examples: 'analyse WI #6587 and create a task', 'check best practices for ALMMyClass'.
`project`	No	Optional: Azure DevOps project name. Falls back to DEVOPS_PROJECT env var.
`assignTo`	No	Optional: assignee email for task creation step, e.g. 'dev@company.com'.
`objectName`	No	Optional: object name to use when goal references a D365 object (overrides name parsed from goal).
`workItemId`	No	Optional: work item ID to use when goal references 'WI #N' (overrides ID parsed from goal text).
`description`	No	Optional: additional description text to pass to task creation step.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedAug 12, 2026
RemovedMar 25, 2026

Changed1 schema field changedMar 12, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / goal / description

Previous value: -"Natural language goal OR a JSON array of explicit steps. Examples: 'analyse WI #6587 and create a task', 'check best practices for HSOMyClass'."New value: +"Natural language goal OR a JSON array of explicit steps. Examples: 'analyse WI #6587 and create a task', 'check best practices for ALMMyClass'."

First observedMar 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already signal mutating/destructive capability and non-read-only behavior. The description adds planner-specific traits: NL parsing disabled, maximum 5 steps, chain stop on critical failure, SSE progress events, and pure in-process execution. The parenthetical listing tools as 'critical failures' is somewhat ambiguous, but it does not contradict the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Purpose is front-loaded and the content is organized with headings, bullets, and an example. A few phrases are redundant ('chain-of-tools' vs 'chaining tools') and the critical-failure parenthetical is confusing, but the length is justified by the tool's complexity.

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?

Covers when and how to call the tool, the maximum number of steps, and failure-stopping behavior. However, there is no output schema and the description never states what the call returns (e.g., per-step results vs aggregated response), which is a notable gap for an orchestration tool.

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 extra semantics for the overloaded 'goal' parameter by showing the exact JSON array format and a concrete example, and by clarifying that natural language parsing is disabled. Optional parameters are left to the schema, which is acceptable at full coverage.

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?

Opens with 'Execute a multi-step JSON plan in ONE call by chaining tools', giving a specific verb, object, and mechanism. The 'CHAIN-OF-TOOLS PLANNER' label and explicit JSON array format distinguish it from the sibling single-purpose tools.

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?

Provides dedicated 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' sections with concrete conditions: exact sequence known, 2-5 steps, independent outputs, and SSE progress desired. It explicitly excludes single calls, interactive decisions, and plans over 5 steps, which gives clear routing guidance.

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 tools Inspect

Try in Browser