Skip to main content
Glama
DynamicEndpoints

Microsoft 365 Core MCP Server

call_microsoft_api

Execute direct API calls to Microsoft Graph or Azure Resource Management endpoints with customizable HTTP methods, parameters, and response formats for managing Microsoft 365 services.

Instructions

Make direct calls to any Microsoft Graph or Azure Resource Management API endpoint with full control over HTTP methods and parameters.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
apiTypeYesAPI type: Microsoft Graph or Azure Resource Management
pathYesAPI URL path (e.g., '/users')
methodYesHTTP method
apiVersionNoAzure API version (required for Azure APIs)
subscriptionIdNoAzure Subscription ID (for Azure APIs)
queryParamsNoQuery parameters
bodyNoRequest body (for POST, PUT, PATCH)
graphApiVersionNoMicrosoft Graph API version to use (default: v1.0)v1.0
fetchAllNoSet to true to automatically fetch all pages for list results (e.g., users, groups). Default is false.
consistencyLevelNoGraph API ConsistencyLevel header. ADVISED to be set to 'eventual' for Graph GET requests using advanced query parameters ($filter, $count, $search, $orderby).
maxRetriesNoMaximum number of retries for failed requests (0-5, default: 3)
retryDelayNoBase delay between retries in milliseconds (100-10000, default: 1000)
timeoutNoRequest timeout in milliseconds (5000-300000, default: 30000)
customHeadersNoAdditional custom headers to include in the request
responseFormatNoResponse format: 'json' (full response), 'raw' (as received), 'minimal' (values only)json
selectFieldsNoArray of specific fields to select (applies $select automatically for Graph API)
expandFieldsNoArray of fields to expand (applies $expand automatically for Graph API)
batchSizeNoBatch size for pagination when fetchAll is true (1-1000, default: 100)
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations indicate the tool is not read-only, idempotent, or destructive, but the description does not add significant behavioral context beyond this, such as rate limits, authentication requirements, or error handling details. It mentions 'full control' but lacks specifics on what that entails operationally.

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 front-loads the core functionality without unnecessary words, making it easy to understand quickly and earning its place by clearly stating the tool's scope and control level.

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?

Given the high complexity (18 parameters, no output schema) and rich schema coverage, the description is minimal but adequate for a generic API call tool. However, it lacks guidance on response handling, error scenarios, or integration with sibling tools, which could improve completeness for such a versatile tool.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the input schema fully documents all 18 parameters, including their purposes and constraints. The description does not add meaningful semantic details beyond what the schema provides, such as examples of common use cases or parameter interactions.

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 states the tool's purpose with specific verbs ('Make direct calls') and resources ('Microsoft Graph or Azure Resource Management API endpoint'), distinguishing it from sibling tools by emphasizing 'full control over HTTP methods and parameters' rather than specialized operations like batch queries or searches.

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 implies usage context by mentioning 'full control over HTTP methods and parameters,' suggesting this tool is for custom API interactions, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like execute_graph_batch or execute_delta_query, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites.

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/DynamicEndpoints/m365-core-mcp'

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