Skip to main content
Glama
phillipboesger

Polarion MCP Server

deleteTestRunTestParameterDefinition

DestructiveIdempotent

Delete a test parameter definition from a specific test run in Polarion. Set dry_run to preview the irreversible request before executing it.

Instructions

Deletes the specified Test Parameter Definition for the specified Test Run. 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.
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.
testRunIdYesThe Test Run's ID within its project.
testParamIdYesThe Test Parameter.

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 / testRunId / description
      Previous value: -"The Test Run ID."New value: +"The Test Run's ID within its project."
  2. 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"
      +}
  3. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the destructiveHint annotation by explicitly stating that data removed is unrecoverable through the API. It also discloses the dry_run preview behavior and the unusual error-flagged result for typed-output tools, which an agent could not reliably infer from annotations or schema alone.

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?

Four front-loaded sentences: the action comes first, followed by irreversibility, the dry_run tip, and the preview-flag caveat. There is no filler or redundant restatement of schema fields.

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?

Given no output schema, simple primitive parameters, and a destructive annotation set, the description covers purpose, safety, and unusual dry_run behavior. An agent has enough information to invoke the tool correctly and interpret the non-standard preview result.

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 schema already documents all four parameters in sufficient detail. The description adds a useful dry_run tip but does not materially extend parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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?

Clearly identifies the action ('Deletes') and the resource ('Test Parameter Definition for the specified Test Run'), matching the method name and making the core purpose obvious. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like deleteTestRunTestParameter, so differentiation is carried by the resource phrasing rather than an explicit comparison.

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 irreversible-effect warning and the suggestion to set dry_run first provide operational context and imply a safe usage pattern for a destructive operation. However, there is no explicit statement of when this tool should be preferred over related test-parameter tools or when not to use it.

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