Skip to main content
Glama
phillipboesger

Polarion MCP Server

deleteDocumentParts

DestructiveIdempotent

Delete specific document parts in Polarion. Use dry_run to preview the request and avoid irreversible data removal.

Instructions

Deletes a list of Document Parts. Effect: irreversible — data removed or overwritten by this call cannot be recovered through the API. Tip: set dry_run: true first to preview the exact request Polarion would receive, without changing anything. On tools with a typed output schema, this preview is returned as an error-flagged result since it is not real tool output -- read the text content regardless of that flag.

Input Schema

TableJSON 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.
spaceIdYesThe Document Space ID (a folder-like grouping of documents/pages within a project). Use `_default` (no quotes) to address the project's default space.
projectIdYesThe 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.
requestBodyYesThe list of Document Part IDs to delete.
documentNameYesThe Document name.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 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."
    • changedInput schema / properties / spaceId / description
      Previous value: -"The Space ID. (Use '_default' without quotes to address the default Space.)"New value: +"The Document Space ID (a folder-like grouping of documents/pages within a project). Use `_default` (no quotes) to address the project's default space."
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes well beyond the destructiveHint annotation by stating that deletion is irreversible and data cannot be recovered through the API. It also explains the dry_run preview behavior, including that the preview may be returned as an error-flagged result on typed output tools and that the text content should be read regardless. These are valuable behavioral details not present in the annotations.

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 composed of three sentences, with the purpose front-loaded, followed by an irreversible warning and a dry_run tip. The last sentence is somewhat long but provides important context for interpreting error-flagged preview results. Overall, each sentence carries necessary value and there is no redundancy.

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?

For a destructive delete tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential safety aspects: irreversibility, dry_run preview, and how to interpret the preview response. Together with the fully documented input schema, it provides sufficient context for an agent to invoke the tool correctly, though it does not mention any prerequisites or post-conditions beyond the warning.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds meaningful semantics for the dry_run parameter by explaining that the preview is error-flagged and must be read from text content, which is not explicitly in the schema. It does not add semantics for other parameters, but the schema covers them adequately.

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 states 'Deletes a list of Document Parts,' which is a specific verb-resource pair. It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like moveDocumentParts, overwriteDocumentParts, and getDocumentParts by explicitly naming the delete action and the target resource.

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 gives clear context for when to use this tool: to delete document parts. It also includes a practical safety tip to use dry_run first for preview. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as moveDocumentParts or overwriteDocumentParts, leaving some room for inference.

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