Skip to main content
Glama
phillipboesger

Polarion MCP Server

by phillipboesger
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

patchGlobalCustomFields

Idempotent

Apply updates to global custom fields in Polarion, with a dry-run option to preview the request first.

Instructions

Updates the specified Custom Fields in the Global context. Effect: idempotent — calling it again with the same input leaves the resource in the same end state, with no additional side effects. 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.
targetTypeYesIdentifies the target resource type this operation applies to (e.g. `workitem`). Use `~` (no quotes) to mean no specific target type.
requestBodyYesCustom Fields Body
resourceTypeYesThe Resource Type.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 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 / targetType / description
      Previous value: -"The Custom Field target type. (Use '~' when there is no specific type for the Prototype.)"New value: +"Identifies the target resource type this operation applies to (e.g. `workitem`). Use `~` (no quotes) to mean no specific target type."
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description explains idempotence in plain language beyond the idempotentHint annotation, and details the dry_run preview behavior, including the error-flagged result quirk. This adds meaningful behavioral context that annotations alone don't provide.

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?

The description is two sentences plus a tip, front-loading the core action and then adding idempotence and preview guidance. Every sentence earns its place; it's efficient and well-organized.

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 mutation tool with nested requestBody, the description covers idempotence and preview, and the schema covers parameters. It doesn't describe return values, but no output schema exists, and the key operational concerns (side effects, preview) are addressed. The global vs project distinction is implicit but sufficient given the sibling set.

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?

All parameters have descriptions in the schema, and the tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides. The dry_run tip references the parameter but doesn't expand on its semantics beyond the schema's own description.

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 a specific verb ('Updates'), a specific resource ('Custom Fields'), and a scope ('Global context'), which clearly distinguishes it from project-specific siblings like patchProjectCustomFields. The name and description together leave no ambiguity about the target.

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 implies usage in the global context and provides a concrete tip (dry_run) for safe previewing. It doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives like patchCustomField or postGlobalCustomFields, but the context is clear enough for an agent to infer the appropriate scenario.

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