Skip to main content
Glama

closeCollection

Closes a Polarion Collection by changing its lifecycle state while retaining its contents, requiring update permission. Use it to finalize a completed cycle; preview with dry_run first.

Instructions

Closes one Collection, changing its lifecycle state while retaining its contents. Requires permission to update the Collection. Use reopenCollection to make a closed Collection active again, or reuseCollection when continuing its contents as a new cycle. Effect: triggers a server-side action rather than a plain resource creation — whether repeating it is safe, a no-op, or rejected depends on the specific action; treat it as not guaranteed idempotent. Tip: set dry_run: true first to validate the arguments and preview the exact request without sending it to Polarion. The executor returns this preview as normal text, and as structured content when the tool declares an output schema.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dry_runNoIf true, validates the request and returns the exact request that would be sent to Polarion — with the Authorization header redacted and any binary payload summarized by byte length — without actually sending it.
projectIdYesThe Polarion project ID (its URL segment, e.g. `myproject`), case-sensitive. Required to scope the request to one project. If the ID is unknown, ask the user; getProjects lists IDs only with global read access.
collectionIdYesThe Collection ID.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.4.4
    • changedInput schema / properties / projectId / description
      Previous value: -"The Polarion project ID (its URL segment, e.g. `myproject`), case-sensitive. Required to scope the request to one project; call getProjects to list valid IDs."New value: +"The Polarion project ID (its URL segment, e.g. `myproject`), case-sensitive. Required to scope the request to one project. If the ID is unknown, ask the user; getProjects lists IDs only with global read access."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.2.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / dry_run / description
      Previous value: -"If true, validate and return the request that would be sent without calling Polarion."New value: +"If true, validates the request and returns the exact request that would be sent to Polarion — with the Authorization header redacted and any binary payload summarized by byte length — without actually sending it."
    • changedInput schema / properties / projectId / description
      Previous value: -"The Project ID."New value: +"The Polarion project ID (its URL segment, e.g. `myproject`), case-sensitive. Required to scope the request to one project; call getProjects to list valid IDs."
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: annotations only say it is not read-only, is open-world, is not idempotent, and is not destructive. The description adds that contents are retained, that update permission is required, that it triggers a server-side action whose repeat behavior depends on the action, and that dry_run can preview the exact request.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose and follows with alternatives, behavioral caveats, and the dry-run tip. It is somewhat long, but each sentence contributes distinct routing or behavioral information and none of it is redundant with the annotations.

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?

For a non-idempotent, open-world mutation with no output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: lifecycle semantics, content retention, permission requirement, sibling alternatives, idempotency uncertainty, and a safe dry-run validation path.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, and all three parameters are fully documented in the input schema. The description still adds procedural meaning for dry_run ('set `dry_run: true` first to validate the arguments and preview the exact request') and notes how the preview is returned, which is useful beyond the schema text.

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 ('Closes one Collection') plus the key lifecycle effect ('changing its lifecycle state while retaining its contents'). That retention detail distinguishes it from deleteCollection and from the reopen/reuse siblings without requiring schema inspection.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to alternatives: 'Use `reopenCollection` to make a closed Collection active again, or `reuseCollection` when continuing its contents as a new cycle.' The condition selecting each sibling is stated, and the permission prerequisite is included.

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