Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Polarion MCP Server

Polarion MCP Server

by phillipboesger
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Read LiveDoc section

read_document_section
Read-onlyIdempotent

Reads a single Polarion LiveDoc section by part ID or exact heading path at a chosen revision. Returns the section ID, heading path, Markdown, and truncation status.

Instructions

Reads one LiveDoc section at the requested revision and returns {partId, headingPath, markdown, truncated}. Requires a project ID, space ID, and document name readable by the signed-in Polarion user; select the section with its part ID or exact heading path. Use read_document_markdown for the full body or get_document_outline to discover headings and IDs first.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
part_idNoExact LiveDoc part ID from `get_document_outline`; identifies the section heading.
spaceIdYesDocument space ID within the project, such as `Specifications`.
documentYesLiveDoc name within the space, not a composite project/space/document path.
revisionNoRepository revision to read; omit to use the current revision.
max_charsNoMaximum returned Markdown characters; defaults to 20000 and is capped at 100000.
projectIdYesPolarion project ID that owns the LiveDoc, such as `PROJECT`.
heading_pathNoExact heading path as an array of titles or a string joined with ` > `; use the outline to copy it.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed8 schema fields changedv1.4.4
    • addedInput schema / properties / document / description
      Added value: +"LiveDoc name within the space, not a composite project/space/document path."
    • addedInput schema / properties / heading_path / description
      Added value: +"Exact heading path as an array of titles or a string joined with ` > `; use the outline to copy it."
    • changedInput schema / properties / heading_path / oneOf
      Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "items": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "type": "array"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "items": {
+      "description": "One heading title in the path, from the outermost heading to the target.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "type": "array"
+  }
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / max_chars / description
      Added value: +"Maximum returned Markdown characters; defaults to 20000 and is capped at 100000."
    • addedInput schema / properties / part_id / description
      Added value: +"Exact LiveDoc part ID from `get_document_outline`; identifies the section heading."
    • addedInput schema / properties / projectId / description
      Added value: +"Polarion project ID that owns the LiveDoc, such as `PROJECT`."
    • addedInput schema / properties / revision / description
      Added value: +"Repository revision to read; omit to use the current revision."
    • addedInput schema / properties / spaceId / description
      Added value: +"Document space ID within the project, such as `Specifications`."
  2. Addedv1.4.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent and open-world semantics, so the description focuses on what they cannot convey: the required authorization context and the fact that output may be truncated. It does not explain how truncation interacts with max_chars or whether truncated results must be re-fetched, which is the remaining behavior gap.

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?

Three sentences, zero filler: capability and return shape first, prerequisites second, sibling routing last. Every clause earns its place.

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 no output schema, the description supplies the return shape ({partId, headingPath, markdown, truncated}), the required identifiers, and the selector options — everything needed to invoke and interpret the call correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents every parameter including defaults and caps. The description only restates the two section selectors (part ID vs. exact heading path) and the revision default, adding no syntax or format detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Reads one LiveDoc section') plus the revision scope, and names two siblings it is distinct from (read_document_markdown, get_document_outline). An agent can differentiate it without opening any 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?

Explicitly routes alternatives: full body goes to read_document_markdown, heading/ID discovery goes to get_document_outline first. It also states the prerequisite that the caller needs a document readable by the signed-in Polarion user.

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