Skip to main content
Glama
rededis

dataverse-mcp-server

by rededis
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

invoke_action

Invoke Dataverse Web API actions via POST for non-CRUD operations. Supports bound and unbound calls like QualifyLead, passing JSON parameters as the request body.

Instructions

Invoke a Dataverse Web API action (POST) — bound or unbound. Use for operations that are not plain CRUD, e.g. PublishDuplicateRule (bound to a duplicaterule) or QualifyLead (bound to a lead), or UnpublishDuplicateRule (unbound, takes DuplicateRuleId). Whether an action is bound is defined in the Web API $metadata. Pass entity_set+id for bound actions, neither for unbound. parameters becomes the JSON request body.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoRecord GUID the bound action targets. Required iff entity_set is set.
nameYesAction name, e.g. 'PublishDuplicateRule', 'QualifyLead'. Bare names are namespaced automatically for bound calls; pass a fully-qualified name to override.
entity_setNoEntity set (plural, e.g. 'leads') for a bound action. Omit for unbound actions.
parametersNoAction parameters sent as the JSON request body (e.g. { DuplicateRuleId } for PublishDuplicateRule, { CreateAccount, CreateContact, Status } for QualifyLead).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.9.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. First observedv0.5.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden: it discloses the HTTP verb (POST), that it is a mutation-style call, how binding is determined ($metadata), the entity_set+id pairing rule, and that parameters become the request body, plus the bare-vs-fully-qualified name override. It stops short of permissions, error behavior, or return shape, which keeps it out of the top band.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with purpose before mechanics. Every clause carries actionable information — no filler, no restatement of the tool name.

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 an open-ended POST-invocation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers invocation semantics thoroughly enough to call it correctly. The one remaining gap is what comes back (arbitrary action responses), though with no output schema and free-form payloads that is hard to specify usefully.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds a genuine cross-parameter constraint the schema states only per-field: 'Pass entity_set+id for bound actions, neither for unbound.' The namespacing override note and the body-mapping note are reinforced but largely duplicate the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Invoke a Dataverse Web API action (POST)') plus the bound/unbound axis, and explicitly positions itself against plain CRUD. An agent can distinguish it from create_record/update_record and the other siblings without opening the schema.

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?

Gives a clear selection rule — 'use for operations that are not plain CRUD' — with concrete examples (PublishDuplicateRule, QualifyLead, UnpublishDuplicateRule) and the mechanical rule for bound vs unbound calls. It does not explicitly route the agent away from the closely-related invoke_function sibling, which is the one ambiguity left.

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