Skip to main content
Glama
phillipboesger

Polarion MCP Server

by phillipboesger
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

setLicense

Assign a license type and group to a Polarion user. Use dry_run to preview the exact request before applying.

Instructions

Sets the User's license. Effect: triggers a server-side action rather than a plain resource creation — whether repeating it is safe, a no-op, or rejected depends on the specific action; treat it as not guaranteed 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
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

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description explicitly warns that the operation is a server-side action and 'not guaranteed idempotent,' adding nuance beyond the idempotentHint=false annotation. It also explains the dry_run preview behavior, including the error-flagged result, which is genuinely useful behavioral context. Nothing contradicts the annotations.

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, front-loaded with the core action, followed by a valuable safety warning and a concrete usage tip. No filler; the generic note about typed output schemas earns its place because it prevents misinterpretation of the dry_run result.

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?

The description covers the non-idempotent nature, the dry-run workflow, and the fact that previews are returned as error-flagged results, which is important given there is no output schema. It does not describe the normal success response or error cases for an actual call, but the combination of schema coverage and behavioral warnings is largely sufficient for safe invocation.

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?

With schema description coverage at 100%, the schema already documents userId, dry_run, and requestBody, including the license enum. The description reinforces dry_run usage but does not add semantic detail 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?

The description opens with a specific verb and object ('Sets the User's license'), making the tool's primary function immediately clear. It does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling license tools such as patchLicenseAssignment or getLicenseAssignmentsForUser, so it misses the top tier for sibling differentiation.

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 dry-run tip gives a concrete, safe invocation strategy ('set dry_run: true first to preview... without changing anything'), which is clear usage guidance. It does not, however, name alternative tools or state when setLicense should be chosen over patchLicenseAssignments or other license-related siblings, so exclusions are absent.

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