Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Pega DX MCP Server

Pega DX MCP Server

by marco-looy
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

get_assignment

Fetch assignment details including form structure, required fields, available actions, and eTag to support subsequent operations after case creation.

Instructions

Get assignment details including form fields, required fields, available actions, and eTag. Used BETWEEN case creation and action performance. Returns form structure, action IDs, and eTag needed for subsequent operations. Required fields marked with "required": true in view config (uiResources.resources.views). Pessimistic locking may apply.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNameNoIf provided, returns view metadata for the pageName view (only used when viewType is "page")
viewTypeNoUI resources to return. "form" (recommended): field metadata and view structure. "page": full page UI metadata. Both include required field markers in view config.form
assignmentIDYesAssignment ID from create_case (nextAssignmentInfo.ID) or perform_assignment_action. Format: ASSIGN-WORKLIST {caseID}!{processID}. Example: ASSIGN-WORKLIST PBANK-LOAN-WORK V-76003!REVIEW_FLOW
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.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.0.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / assignmentID / description
      Previous value: -"Full handle of an assignment. Example: ASSIGN-WORKLIST PBANK-LOAN-WORK V-76003!REVIEW_FLOW"New value: +"Assignment ID from create_case (nextAssignmentInfo.ID) or perform_assignment_action. Format: ASSIGN-WORKLIST {caseID}!{processID}. Example: ASSIGN-WORKLIST PBANK-LOAN-WORK V-76003!REVIEW_FLOW"
    • addedInput schema / properties / sessionCredentials
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional 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.",
+  "properties": {
+    "accessToken": {
+      "description": "Direct access token (required for token mode)",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "apiVersion": {
+      "default": "v2",
+      "description": "API version (optional, defaults to v2)",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "baseUrl": {
+      "description": "Pega base URL (required if providing credentials)",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "clientId": {
+      "description": "OAuth2 client ID (required for OAuth mode)",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "clientSecret": {
+      "description": "OAuth2 client secret (required for OAuth mode)",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "sessionId": {
+      "description": "Optional session ID. If not provided, a new session will be created.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "tokenExpiry": {
+      "description": "Token expiry in seconds from now (optional for token mode)",
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / viewType / default
      Previous value: -"page"New value: +"form"
    • changedInput schema / properties / viewType / description
      Previous value: -"Type of view data to return. \"form\" returns only assignment UI metadata in uiResources object, \"page\" returns full page (read-only review mode) UI metadata in uiResources object"New value: +"UI resources to return. \"form\" (recommended): field metadata and view structure. \"page\": full page UI metadata. Both include required field markers in view config."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'Pessimistic locking may apply' and explains the eTag requirement, which are useful behavioral traits. However, it does not explicitly confirm that the operation is read-only.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and each sentence adds value without unnecessary detail. It is efficient and well-structured.

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?

Given 4 parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description adequately covers the return values ('form structure, action IDs, and eTag') and explains the viewType parameter. It could elaborate slightly on pageName but is generally 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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds some context (e.g., assignmentID format example, explanation of 'required' field markers), but most parameter details are already in 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?

The description clearly states 'Get assignment details including form fields, required fields, available actions, and eTag.' It also specifies the usage context 'BETWEEN case creation and action performance,' which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_assignment_action and perform_assignment_action.

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?

The description indicates the tool is used between case creation and action performance, providing context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools such as get_assignment_action for action-specific details.

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