Skip to main content
Glama
marco-looy

Pega DX MCP Server

by marco-looy

perform_case_action

Execute a case action on a Pega case by specifying the case ID and action ID, optionally updating case fields and attachments to progress the workflow.

Instructions

Perform an action on a Pega case, updating case data and progressing the workflow. Takes the case ID and action ID as parameters, along with optional content, page instructions, and attachments. If no eTag is provided, automatically fetches the latest eTag from the case action. For manual eTag management, provide an eTag value from a previous get_case_action call. The API handles pre-processing logic, merges request data into the case, performs the action, and validates the results.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
caseIDYesCase ID. Example: "MYORG-APP-WORK C-1001". Complete identifier including spaces."ON6E5R-DIYRecipe-Work-RecipeCollection R-1008". a complete case identifier including spaces and special characters.
actionIDYesAction ID for case/stage action (Example: "pyUpdateCaseDetails", "pyApproval"). CRITICAL: Action IDs are CASE-SENSITIVE and have no spaces even if display names do ("Edit details" → "pyUpdateCaseDetails"). Use get_case to find correct ID from availableActions array - use "ID" field not "name" field.
eTagNoOptional. Auto-fetched if omitted. For faster execution, use eTag from previous response.
contentNoOptional map of scalar and embedded page values to be set to the fields included in the case action's view. Only fields that are part of the submitted case action's view can be modified. Field names should match the property names defined in the Pega application. Example: {"CustomerName": "John Doe", "Priority": "High", "Status": "InProgress"}. Values will overwrite any settings made from pre-processing Data Transforms.
pageInstructionsNoOptional list of page-related operations for embedded pages, page lists, or page groups. Required for setting embedded page references. Only pages included in the case action's view can be modified.
attachmentsNoOptional list of binary file attachments to upload inline during action execution. NOTE: This is NOT the correct way to link a previously uploaded temporary attachment (from upload_attachment) to an attachment field in the form. For that use case, use pageInstructions with instruction "REPLACE", target ".FieldName", and content {"ID": "temporary-attachment-id"} instead.
viewTypeNoType of UI resources to return in the response. "none" returns no UI resources (default), "form" returns form UI metadata in read-only review mode without page-specific metadata, "page" returns full page UI metadata in read-only review mode. Use "form" or "page" when you need UI structure information for displaying the results.none
skipRoboticAutomationNoWhen set to true, post processing robotic automation is skipped while submitting the form. When set to false, post processing robotic automation is considered while submitting the form. Default: false. Use true when robotic automation failures are preventing form submission.
originChannelNoOptional origin channel identifier for this service request. Indicates the source of the request for tracking and audit purposes. Examples: "Web", "Mobile", "WebChat". Default value is "Web" if not specified.
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.
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 outlines the process (pre-processing, data merging, validation), notes action ID case sensitivity, eTag behavior, and attachment handling. It is transparent about the API workflow, though it does not detail potential side effects or authentication requirements beyond the sessionCredentials parameter.

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?

The description is well-structured, starting with purpose then detailing parameters and behavior. While moderately long, each sentence adds value and the structure is logical. Minor improvement would be to tighten some explanations.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the tool's functionality well, including parameter nuances, workflow steps, and authentication via sessionCredentials. It does not explain the return value format or prerequisites, but for a tool with 10 parameters and nested objects, it is sufficiently complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds significant extra value for many parameters: eTag (auto-fetch vs manual), actionID (case sensitivity, source), attachments (usage guidance), pageInstructions (examples, instruction types), content (example), and others. This greatly enhances understanding beyond the schema.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the verb (perform) and resource (case action) with 'Perform an action on a Pega case, updating case data and progressing the workflow.' It distinguishes from sibling tools like perform_assignment_action by focusing on case actions, but could explicitly contrast to avoid ambiguity.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description explains parameter usage (e.g., eTag auto-fetch) but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like perform_assignment_action. Some context is given, but no exclusions or situational advice.

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