Skip to main content
Glama

move_work_item_from_document

Destructive

Detach a work item from its document, returning it to a free-floating state while preserving all history and attributes.

Instructions

Detach a work item from its document, returning it to free-floating state.

Inverse of move_work_item_to_document. Calls the moveFromDocument action endpoint, which clears the work item's module relationship and removes the corresponding document part. This is the ONLY supported detach path because Polarion rejects PATCH attempts on the module relationship.

The work item resource itself is preserved (with all history, links, and attributes) and reappears as a free-floating work item visible to list_work_items but not to any document. To re-attach, call move_work_item_to_document.

Calling this on a work item that is already free-floating returns HTTP 400, surfaced here as RuntimeError — not idempotent. Heading-type work items CAN be detached; the heading becomes a free-floating work item with space_id="" and outline_number="" (orphan-like state, but the work item is intact).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYesProject containing the work item.
work_item_idYesShort ID of an EXISTING work item (e.g. 'MCPT-042').
dry_runNoWhen True, return payload preview without calling Polarion.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
movedYesTrue on a real move; False on dry-run.
dry_runYesWhether this was a dry-run.
payload_previewYesRequest payload sent or previewed; None after real ops.
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, etc.), the description adds significant detail: it names the API endpoint ('moveFromDocument'), explains the effect on the work item (clears 'module' relationship, removes document part), confirms preservation of history and links, describes the error for non-idempotent calls, and covers edge cases like headings. No contradiction with annotations.

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 well-structured and concise. It starts with the primary purpose, then provides context about its relationship to the sibling tool, explains the API call, results, error conditions, and special cases for headings—all in a few efficient sentences with no wasted words.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's moderate complexity, full schema coverage, rich annotations, and presence of an output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It covers the operation's effect, error semantics, edge cases (headings), and relationship to other tools, leaving no critical gaps for an AI agent.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add new information beyond what is already in the input schema: 'work_item_id' is described as existing (schema already says 'EXISTING'), and 'dry_run' behavior is already explained. No meaningful enhancement.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Detach') and resource ('work item from document'), and explicitly identifies itself as the inverse of 'move_work_item_to_document', distinguishing it from all sibling tools.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool (the only supported detach path), warns against calling on already free-floating items (HTTP 400), and suggests the alternative 'move_work_item_to_document' for reattachment. It also notes that heading-type work items may be detached, giving full context.

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/devemberx/mcp-server-polarion'

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