Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Polarion MCP Server

Polarion MCP Server

by phillipboesger
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

setLicense

Destructive

Set a Polarion user's license type, group, and concurrency; use dry_run to validate and preview the irreversible request before applying changes.

Instructions

Sets the User's license. Effect: irreversible — data removed or overwritten by this call cannot be recovered through the API. 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.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
userIdYesThe User ID.
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.
requestBodyYesThe user license body.

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. 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"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / requestBody / properties / license / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "REVIEWER",
-  "XBase",
-  "XPro",
-  "XEnterprise",
-  "PRO",
-  "REQUIREMENTS",
-  "QA",
-  "ALM"
-]New value: +[
+  "REVIEWER",
+  "XReviewer",
+  "XBase",
+  "XEssentials",
+  "XPro",
+  "XStandard",
+  "XEnterprise",
+  "XAdvanced",
+  "XExtended",
+  "XPremium",
+  "XAutomotive",
+  "PRO",
+  "REQUIREMENTS",
+  "QA",
+  "ALM"
+]
  3. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare `destructiveHint: true` and `idempotentHint: false`, so the safety profile is structured. The description still adds value by spelling out irreversibility ('cannot be recovered through the API') and detailing the dry-run preview return format, which annotations do not convey.

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 is front-loaded, followed by the risk warning and then the dry-run tip. Four sentences are mostly justified, though the preview explanation is slightly verbose and partially repeats the schema's `dry_run` description.

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 destructive mutation with rich annotations and a fully described schema, the description supplies the key missing pieces: irreversibility and a safe validation path. It does not clarify sibling selection against `patchLicense`, which is the remaining gap.

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 `userId`, `dry_run`, and the nested `requestBody` fields are already fully documented. The description mentions `dry_run` but adds no syntax, format, or validation details beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Sets the User's license.' An agent can tell it mutates a single user's license rather than listing assignments. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling `patchLicense`, leaving ambiguity about which mutation to choose.

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?

Explicitly recommends setting `dry_run: true` first to validate and preview before committing, which is actionable guidance for a destructive call. It does not state when to prefer this over `patchLicense` or other license-related siblings, so the guidance is contextual but incomplete.

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