Run custom OData queries against Dynamics 365 Web API to filter, select, and retrieve CRM entity data for AI agents and integrations.
Execute a custom OData query against Dynamics 365 Web API
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Raw OData query (e.g., "contacts?$filter=statecode eq 0&$select=firstname,lastname") |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose whether the query is read-only, whether it can mutate data, rate limits, authentication requirements, or error behavior. 'Execute' is ambiguous about side effects.
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?
Single sentence, front-loaded with verb and resource, zero waste. It is appropriately sized for a one-parameter tool.
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 one-parameter query tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimal. It lacks any behavioral context (read-only, error handling, permissions) and does not clarify how it differs from query_entities.
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?
Schema coverage is 100%, and the parameter description includes a concrete example of the raw OData query format, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The tool description adds no parameter details beyond what the schema provides; baseline 3 is appropriate.
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?
States a specific verb (Execute) and resource (custom OData query against Dynamics 365 Web API). It distinguishes itself from siblings like query_entities and execute_function by emphasizing 'custom OData query' and 'raw' input, 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.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Usage is implied for cases needing raw OData syntax, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. An agent must infer that query_entities is for structured queries and this tool is for custom OData.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.