Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Dynamics 365 MCP Server

Dynamics 365 MCP Server

by Kenny-666
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

publish_appmodule

Destructive

Previews then submits native AppModule PublishXml in Dynamics 365, requiring the preview hash and explicit publish approval to execute.

Instructions

Preview then submit native AppModule PublishXml. Requires expected_hash and allow_app_publish for execution. Acceptance does not verify runtime or dependent components.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "publish_appmodule"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
dry_runNo
expected_hashNoCurrent planHash from the publication preview, required for execution.
allow_app_publishNo
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

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the destructive and non-idempotent annotations, the description discloses the preview-then-submit workflow and the important caveat that acceptance does not verify runtime or dependent components. It does not cover permissions or rollback behavior, but it adds meaningful behavioral context.

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 three tight sentences with the core workflow and constraints front-loaded. Every sentence adds useful information and there is no redundant wording.

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?

For a destructive publish tool with five parameters and no output schema, the description covers the critical execution requirements and an acceptance limitation. It leaves some parameter semantics and failure behavior implicit, but it is largely complete for correct invocation.

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 low at 40%, so the description should compensate. It clarifies that expected_hash and allow_app_publish are required for execution and implies preview via dry_run, but it does not explain the required id parameter or the environment_profile parameter’s role beyond the schema description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a specific action and resource: preview then submit native AppModule PublishXml. This is clear enough to distinguish it from sibling publishing tools that target sitemaps, ribbons, web resources, or model tables, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

It gives clear operational context: preview first, then submit, and execution requires expected_hash and allow_app_publish. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative publish tools, but the usage context is sufficiently clear.

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