Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Polarion MCP Server

Polarion MCP Server

by phillipboesger
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

patchWorkItem

Updates a single Polarion Work Item by project and ID, with optional dry-run validation to preview changes before applying them.

Instructions

Updates the specified Work Item. Cardinality: targets a single item by ID. For the full collection or a batch, use patchWorkItems instead. 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. Examples: {"projectId":"myproject","workItemId":"WI-123","requestBody":{"data":{"type":"workitems","id":"WI-123","attributes":{"title":"Updated title"}}}}. Selection: Use patchWorkItem to update one Work Item by its project and ID; use patchWorkItems for a project-scoped batch and patchAllWorkItems for a cross-project batch.

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.
workItemIdYesThe Work Item's ID within its project (e.g. `WI-123`), not the combined `project/id` path used in some link payloads.
requestBodyYesThe Work Item body.
changeTypeToNoThe Type the Workitem to change to.
workflowActionNoThe Workflow Action.

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. 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 / workItemId / description
      Previous value: -"The Work Item ID."New value: +"The Work Item's ID within its project (e.g. `WI-123`), not the combined `project/id` path used in some link payloads."
  3. Changed2 schema fields 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"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / requestBody / properties / data / properties / attributes / properties / hyperlinks / items / properties / title
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
  4. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With annotations already declaring a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent mutation, the description adds useful context: single-item cardinality and the dry_run preview mechanics, including how the preview is returned as text and structured content. It stops short of explaining partial-update semantics—what happens to fields omitted from the request—or error/conflict behavior for a mutation tool, which keeps it below a 5.

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 purpose and sibling routing are front-loaded, and the example is compact. However, the initial cardinality sentence and the final 'Selection' sentence restate the same single-vs-batch distinction twice, adding redundant length.

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 six-parameter tool with a deeply nested requestBody and no output schema, the description supplies a concrete example, alternative routing, and dry-run validation guidance. It is largely complete, but does not address response behavior or failure modes, which would help for a mutation tool.

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 input schema already documents projectId, workItemId, requestBody, dry_run, changeTypeTo, and workflowAction. The description's example illustrates the nested requestBody shape, but it adds little semantic meaning beyond the schema, especially for changeTypeTo and workflowAction.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Updates the specified Work Item,' and immediately scopes cardinality to a single item by ID. It explicitly distinguishes this tool from patchWorkItems and patchAllWorkItems, so an agent can identify it 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?

It names both alternatives and the exact condition that should route an agent elsewhere: patchWorkItems for a project-scoped batch and patchAllWorkItems for a cross-project batch. It also recommends setting dry_run first, giving concrete workflow guidance.

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