Skip to main content
Glama

Assign a group to an environment

cs_admin_assign_group

Assign a security role to an Entra group in a Dataverse environment via a team. Confirm is required to make live changes; otherwise, it performs a dry run.

Instructions

Give an Entra group a security role in an environment through a Dataverse team. Changes a live environment: requires confirm: true. Runs 'pac admin assign-group' with the active pac auth profile. Mutates a live environment: requires confirm: true (a dry run otherwise).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cwdNoWorking directory for pac (for project commands: the solution project folder)
roleYesSecurity role name or id
groupYesEntra group object id
confirmNoRequired to actually perform a change in a live environment. Without it the tool returns a dry run.
profileNopac auth profile to run as: the admin account for tenant commands. Defaults to CPS_ADMIN_PROFILE for admin commands and CPS_PAC_PROFILE otherwise, then the active profile. cs_init lists the profiles.
teamTypeYesTeam type (Owner, Access, AadSecurityGroup, AadOfficeGroup)
groupNameYesName of the Dataverse team to create
backgroundNoRun in the background and return a jobId immediately, for a command that takes longer than the client will wait. Poll cs_job_status.
environmentNoEnvironment id or URL
businessUnitNoBusiness unit id
membershipTypeYesMembership type (MembersAndGuests, Members, Owners, Guests)
timeoutSecondsNoDefault 600

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.5

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly discloses that the tool mutates a live environment, requires confirm: true, and performs a dry run otherwise. It also reveals the underlying pac command and profile usage, giving clear behavioral expectations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is brief and front-loaded with the purpose and critical mutation warning. However, it is redundant: it repeats the same confirm requirement twice ('Changes a live environment...' and 'Mutates a live environment...'), which could be condensed into one sentence.

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 tool with 12 parameters and no output schema, the description covers essential context: purpose, mutation risk, confirm requirement, and the underlying command. Parameter details are handled by the schema, and return values are not specified, which is acceptable. It omits alternative tool guidance but is otherwise complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context about the confirm flag and dry-run behavior but does not significantly enhance the schema's parameter descriptions. The underlying command is mentioned, but individual parameters are well documented already.

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?

Clearly states the tool gives an Entra group a security role in an environment via a Dataverse team. It specifies the exact action and resource, and distinguishes from sibling user-assignment tools by focusing on groups. Not tautological or vague.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage for group-based role assignment and notes the confirm requirement for live changes, but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool. It lacks routing to sibling tools like cs_admin_assign_users.

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