Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Dynamics 365 MCP Server

Dynamics 365 MCP Server

by Kenny-666
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

change_word_template

Destructive

Preview, create, update, or delete CRM Word templates using a validated non-macro DOCX, with ETag and optimistic concurrency checks for safe changes.

Instructions

Preview then create, update or delete a CRM Word template. Create and update require a validated non-macro DOCX. Update/delete require native optimistic concurrency and ETag; execution requires expected_hash. No retry after unknown outcome.

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": {
      "scope": "<scope>",
      "action": "<action>"
    },
    "name": "change_word_template"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNo
nameNo
scopeYes
actionYes
dry_runNo
file_pathNo
descriptionNo
expected_hashNo
language_codeNo
content_base64No
entity_logical_nameNo
environment_profileNoOptional named environment profile for this call; omit to use the configured default.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.1.2

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses important safety behavior: destructive delete semantics, required concurrency handling, expected_hash for execution, DOCX validation constraints, and the no-retry rule after an unknown outcome. This is substantial operational context for a destructive, non-idempotent mutation tool.

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 compact and front-loaded: it states the operation first, then the required preconditions, then the critical no-retry warning. Every sentence carries operational value with no filler.

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?

For a complex destructive tool with 12 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the most important safety and concurrency constraints well. However, it does not explain enough parameter relationships or invocation details, especially which parameters apply to which action and how preview output should be interpreted.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 8% across 12 parameters, so the description must carry most parameter meaning. It clarifies expected_hash and DOCX-related requirements, but leaves key parameters such as scope, id, name, dry_run, file_path versus content_base64, language_code, and entity_logical_name unexplained.

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 states a specific operation and resource: preview, then create, update, or delete a CRM Word template. It clearly distinguishes this from read-only siblings such as list_word_templates and download_word_template by naming the mutating actions it performs.

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 clear preconditions: create/update require a validated non-macro DOCX, update/delete require optimistic concurrency and ETag, and execution requires expected_hash. It also warns against retrying after an unknown outcome, though it does not explicitly point to sibling tools for listing or downloading templates.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools