Retrieves the connected user and organization context so AI assistants can verify identity and environment before querying or modifying Dynamics 365 data.
Get information about the currently connected user and organization context.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not state permissions, side effects, response shape, or any other operational detail beyond the broad subject of retrieval.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. However, its extreme brevity contributes to gaps in behavioral and contextual detail, so it is not a perfect 5.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a zero-parameter read tool, the description is minimally adequate: it says the tool returns information about the current user and organization context. But with no output schema and no annotations, it should say more about what information is returned or any relevant constraints.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline for a no-parameter tool is 4, and the description does not introduce confusion about inputs.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a clear verb ('Get') and specific resource scope ('information about the currently connected user and organization context'). It is understandable without opening the schema, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from nearby context/security tools such as get_principal_security_context.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description states what the tool retrieves but gives no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives or when not to use it. Usage is only weakly implied by the phrase 'currently connected user and organization context'.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.