Skip to main content
Glama
marco-looy

Pega DX MCP Server

by marco-looy

delete_related_case

Remove a specific relationship between two cases by deleting their work association in Pega DX systems.

Instructions

Remove related work association between two cases by deleting a specific relationship

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
caseIDYesPrimary case ID from which to remove the related case. Example: "ON6E5R-DIYRecipe-Work-RecipeCollection R-1008". a complete case identifier including spaces and special characters.
related_caseIDYesRelated case ID to be removed from the primary case. Example: "ON6E5R-DIYRecipe-Work-RecipeCollection R-1009". a complete case identifier including spaces and special characters.
sessionCredentialsNoOptional session-specific credentials. If not provided, uses environment variables. Supports two authentication modes: (1) OAuth mode - provide baseUrl, clientId, and clientSecret, or (2) Token mode - provide baseUrl and accessToken.

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function for the 'delete_related_case' tool. It validates input parameters, initializes session configuration, calls the PegaClient's deleteRelatedCase method, and handles errors with standardized error reporting.
    async execute(params) {
      const { caseID, related_caseID } = params;
      let sessionInfo = null;
    
      try {
        sessionInfo = this.initializeSessionConfig(params);
    
        // Validate required parameters using base class
        const requiredValidation = this.validateRequiredParams(params, ['caseID', 'related_caseID']);
        if (requiredValidation) {
          return requiredValidation;
        }
    
        // Execute with standardized error handling
        return await this.executeWithErrorHandling(
          `Delete Related Case: ${related_caseID} from ${caseID}`,
          async () => await this.pegaClient.deleteRelatedCase(caseID.trim(), related_caseID.trim()),
          { sessionInfo }
        );
      } catch (error) {
        return {
          content: [{
            type: 'text',
            text: `## Error: Delete Related Case: ${related_caseID} from ${caseID}\n\n**Unexpected Error**: ${error.message}\n\n${sessionInfo ? `**Session**: ${sessionInfo.sessionId} (${sessionInfo.authMode} mode)\n` : ''}*Error occurred at: ${new Date().toISOString()}*`
          }]
        };
      }
    }
  • The input schema and tool metadata definition for 'delete_related_case', including name, description, properties for caseID and related_caseID, and required fields.
      return {
        name: 'delete_related_case',
        description: 'Remove related work association between two cases by deleting a specific relationship',
        inputSchema: {
          type: 'object',
          properties: {
            caseID: {
              type: 'string',
              description: 'Primary case ID from which to remove the related case. Example: "ON6E5R-DIYRecipe-Work-RecipeCollection R-1008". a complete case identifier including spaces and special characters.'
            },
            related_caseID: {
              type: 'string',
              description: 'Related case ID to be removed from the primary case. Example: "ON6E5R-DIYRecipe-Work-RecipeCollection R-1009". a complete case identifier including spaces and special characters.'
            },
            sessionCredentials: getSessionCredentialsSchema()
          },
          required: ['caseID', 'related_caseID']
        }
      };
    }
  • Helper method in PegaClient class that routes the deleteRelatedCase call to the appropriate API version client (V2 only), checking feature availability first.
    async deleteRelatedCase(caseID, relatedCaseID) {
      if (!this.isFeatureAvailable('relatedCases')) {
        this.throwUnsupportedFeatureError('relatedCases', 'deleteRelatedCase');
      }
      return this.client.deleteRelatedCase(caseID, relatedCaseID);
    }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'delete' implies a destructive mutation, the description doesn't specify permissions required, whether the deletion is reversible, what happens if the relationship doesn't exist, or error handling. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves critical behavioral traits unexplained.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It front-loads the core action and resource, making it immediately understandable. Every part of the sentence earns its place by specifying the operation and target.

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 incomplete. It lacks behavioral context (e.g., side effects, error conditions), usage guidelines, and any mention of what the tool returns. The schema covers parameters well, but the overall context for safe and correct use is inadequate.

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 the schema fully documents all parameters (caseID, related_caseID, sessionCredentials). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what's in the schema—it doesn't clarify parameter interactions, constraints, or examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does all the work.

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?

The description clearly states the specific action ('Remove related work association'), the resource ('between two cases'), and the mechanism ('by deleting a specific relationship'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'relate_cases' (which creates relationships) and 'delete_case' (which deletes entire cases), making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., that a relationship must exist), exclusions, or comparisons to sibling tools like 'relate_cases' or 'delete_case'. The agent must infer usage from the name and schema alone.

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/marco-looy/pega-dx-mcp'

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