Skip to main content
Glama
phillipboesger

Polarion MCP Server

postGlobalIcons

Create a global icon for every Polarion project at once. Preview with dry_run first to avoid duplicate resources, as each call creates a new icon.

Instructions

Icons are identified by order. Scope: spans every project (no project filter). To act on a single project, use postProjectIcons instead. Effect: creates a new resource on each call — calling it again with the same input creates a duplicate; it is not idempotent. 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.
requestBodyYesIcon meta data and file data

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field 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."
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv1.1.0
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "properties": {
      +    "data": {
      +      "items": {
      +        "properties": {
      +          "id": {
      +            "example": "default/example.gif",
      +            "type": "string"
      +          },
      +          "links": {
      +            "properties": {
      +              "self": {
      +                "example": "server-host-name/application-path/enumerations/defaulticons/example.gif",
      +                "type": "string"
      +              }
      +            },
      +            "type": "object"
      +          },
      +          "type": {
      +            "enum": [
      +              "icons"
      +            ],
      +            "type": "string"
      +          }
      +        },
      +        "type": "object"
      +      },
      +      "type": "array"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  3. 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"
      +}
  4. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The annotations already signal non-idempotency informing the agent of expected side effects, and the description adds concrete details: duplicate creation per call, global scope, dry_run behavior, and the error-flagged preview nuance. This exceeds the annotation baseline.

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 informative and each sentence serves a purpose (scope, alternative, effect, tip), but the opening 'Icons are identified by order' is slightly unclear and could be integrated elsewhere. Otherwise, it's well-structured.

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?

With an output schema present and annotations covering safety, the description covers scope, non-idempotency, alternatives, and a practical dry_run mechanism. Nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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 coverage is 100% including dry_run and requestBody descriptions. The description adds practical guidance for dry_run usage and notes the requestBody contains icon data, enriching the bare schema.

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?

The description clearly indicates a global scope, differentiates from postProjectIcons, and states the effect is creating a new resource. However, it never explicitly states 'creates global icons'—the purpose is inferred from the name and the effect line.

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?

Explicitly names the alternative tool (postProjectIcons) for single-project actions frosted with 'instead', and provides a concrete usage tip (dry_run) for safe preview. This gives clear decision 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