Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Dynamics 365 MCP Server

Dynamics 365 MCP Server

by Kenny-666
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

resolve_model_name

Resolve Dataverse logical, schema, collection, or localized display names to exact names for queries and metadata work. Provide a table name to resolve a column; ambiguous names return candidates.

Instructions

Resolve an exact logical, schema, collection or localized display name. Ambiguous names return candidates.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "resolve_model_name"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
entity_logical_nameNoWhen present resolve a column in this table; otherwise resolve a table.
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

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose one genuinely useful trait — ambiguous input returns candidate names rather than erroring — but says nothing about what a successful resolution returns, what happens when nothing matches, or whether any permissions/environment constraints apply.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and then the ambiguity caveat. No filler or repetition of the tool name.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should clarify what a successful resolution produces; it only covers the ambiguous case ('returns candidates'). For a three-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the failure/not-found path and return shape are left unexplained.

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 67%, and the required 'name' parameter has no schema description at all; the description compensates by telling the agent that logical, schema, collection, and localized display names are all valid input forms. That meaning is not recoverable from the schema alone.

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 verb ('Resolve') and enumerates the exact name forms it accepts (logical, schema, collection, localized display), which distinguishes it from lookup-style siblings like list_all_entity_definitions or get_entity_metadata_summary. It stops short of naming a sibling outright, but the resource scope is clear enough to route a request.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no explicit statement of when to use this versus the many sibling lookup tools (get_entity_metadata_summary, list_all_entity_definitions, get_detailed_field_metadata). The line about ambiguous names returning candidates hints at a resolution-then-retry workflow, but that is inferred rather than stated.

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