Skip to main content
Glama
rafteles2016

MCP Dynamics CRM Server

by rafteles2016

dynamics_remove_solution_component

Remove a component from a Dynamics CRM solution by specifying the solution name, component ID, and component type to manage solution configurations.

Instructions

Remove um componente de uma solução

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
solutionUniqueNameYesNome único da solução
componentIdYesID do componente
componentTypeYesTipo do componente

Implementation Reference

  • Handler implementation for dynamics_remove_solution_component.
    server.tool(
      "dynamics_remove_solution_component",
      "Remove um componente de uma solução",
      RemoveComponentFromSolutionSchema.shape,
      async (params: z.infer<typeof RemoveComponentFromSolutionSchema>) => {
        await client.executeAction("RemoveSolutionComponent", {
          ComponentId: params.componentId,
          ComponentType: params.componentType,
          SolutionUniqueName: params.solutionUniqueName,
        });
    
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text" as const,
              text: `Componente removido da solução ${params.solutionUniqueName}!`,
            },
          ],
        };
  • Zod schema definition for RemoveComponentFromSolutionSchema used by the tool.
    export const RemoveComponentFromSolutionSchema = z.object({
      solutionUniqueName: z.string().describe("Nome único da solução"),
      componentId: z.string().describe("ID do componente"),
      componentType: z.number().describe("Tipo do componente"),
    });
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. 'Remove' implies a destructive mutation, but it doesn't disclose whether this is reversible, what permissions are required, or if it affects other components. It lacks behavioral details like error conditions or 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.

Conciseness4/5

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

Single sentence, no wasted words. However, it's overly terse and could benefit from more detail given the complexity of the operation. The Portuguese phrasing might confuse non-Portuguese agents, slightly reducing effectiveness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what happens after removal, potential impacts, or error handling. Given the sibling tools, more context about solution management is needed.

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 100%, so parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning about parameters beyond what's in the schema (e.g., no examples or constraints). Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description states the action ('Remove') and target ('um componente de uma solução'), which is clear but vague. It doesn't specify what type of component or solution, nor does it distinguish from siblings like 'dynamics_delete_solution' or 'dynamics_delete_web_resource'. The Portuguese phrasing adds some ambiguity for English-speaking agents.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, dependencies, or what happens if removal fails. With siblings like 'dynamics_check_solution_dependencies', there's no indication of when dependency checking should precede removal.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/rafteles2016/mcpDynamics'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server