Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Polarion MCP Server

Polarion MCP Server

by phillipboesger
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

deleteProjectEnumeration

DestructiveIdempotent

Deletes a specified enumeration within one Polarion project; run with dry_run first to validate arguments and preview the irreversible request.

Instructions

Deletes the specified Enumeration from the Project context. Scope: one project (requires a project ID). To act across all projects, use deleteGlobalEnumeration instead. Effect: irreversible — data removed or overwritten by this call cannot be recovered through the API. 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.
enumNameYesThe Enumeration Name.
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.
targetTypeYesThe configured subtype for this enumeration or custom field (e.g. `requirement` for a Work Item type). Use `~` (without quotes) when the configuration applies to every subtype.
enumContextYesThe Enumeration context. (Allowed values are '~', 'plans', 'testing' and 'documents'. Use '~' for Work Item or general enumerations.)

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. Changed1 schema field changedv1.4.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / targetType / description
      Previous value: -"Identifies the target resource type this operation applies to (e.g. `workitem`). Use `~` (no quotes) to mean no specific target type."New value: +"The configured subtype for this enumeration or custom field (e.g. `requirement` for a Work Item type). Use `~` (without quotes) when the configuration applies to every subtype."
  3. 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 / targetType / description
      Previous value: -"The Enumeration target type. (Use '~' when there is no specific type for the enumeration.)"New value: +"Identifies the target resource type this operation applies to (e.g. `workitem`). Use `~` (no quotes) to mean no specific target type."
  4. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / dry_run
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "If true, validate and return the request that would be sent without calling Polarion.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  5. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds substance beyond them: it states the loss is irreversible and not recoverable through the API, and it explains the dry_run path including how the preview is returned (plain text and structured content when an output schema exists). Only permission/authorization requirements are left unspecified.

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-loaded with the action, then scope, then the alternative, then the irreversibility warning, then the dry_run tip — a logical order with no filler. The final sentence about text versus structured preview output is slightly over-explained for a delete tool.

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 5-parameter destructive mutation with no output schema, the description covers scope, alternative routing, irreversibility, and safe validation. It leaves out what happens on failure (e.g. nonexistent enumeration) and any permission prerequisites, which would be the remaining gaps.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3 and the schema already documents projectId, enumName, enumContext, and targetType. The description adds meaning the schema doesn't: that projectId is a scope requirement, and that the way to validate parameters safely is to set dry_run first, which is a usage-level insight rather than a restatement.

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 (deletes the specified Enumeration) plus the exact scope (Project context, requires a project ID). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling deleteGlobalEnumeration, so an agent can route correctly without opening the schema.

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?

Names the alternative tool (`deleteGlobalEnumeration`) and the condition that selects it (acting across all projects), and recommends a validation-first workflow via `dry_run: true`. When-to-use and when-to-use-something-else are both explicit.

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