Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

SHIP

by ai.letsship
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Publish a site again after a failed publish

retry_site_publish
Destructive

Build the newest commit of the site's default branch again and publish it, as a push does. It runs only when the newest publish of the site failed for a cause that a new try can fix; for any other cause the refusal names the cause code (a mission's founder view gives the request that fixes it). The new deploy shows in list_site_deploys a moment later. Pass the same idempotencyKey on a retry to publish once; without one, each call is a new request. Requires the config:write capability.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "siteId": "<siteId>"
    },
    "name": "retry_site_publish"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
siteIdYesSite id from list_sites, or publishProblem.siteId of a mission
idempotencyKeyNoAny unique string; repeat it on a retry

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations it discloses the precondition gate, the refusal shape with a cause code, that the new deploy surfaces in list_site_deploys shortly after, and the required config:write capability. The retry-vs-new-request semantics with idempotencyKey are clarified rather than contradicted by idempotentHint=false, since the default call without a key is genuinely non-idempotent.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the action, and each carries distinct information (gate, refusal, verification, idempotency, capability). The parenthetical about the founder view makes one sentence dense, but nothing is filler.

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 only two parameters, no output schema, and full annotation coverage, this description covers everything an agent needs: when it will succeed, what happens on refusal, what capability is required, how to avoid duplicate publishes, and where to confirm the result.

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%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds the consequence of reusing idempotencyKey ('publish once; without one, each call is a new request') and names list_sites / publishProblem.siteId as sources for siteId, which goes slightly beyond the schema text.

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 ('Build the newest commit of the site's default branch again and publish it, as a push does') and scopes it to the recovery path after a failed publish, which distinguishes it from siblings such as rollback_site and list_site_deploys.

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?

Gives an explicit gate for use ('only when the newest publish of the site failed for a cause that a new try can fix') and an explicit when-not with the resulting behavior ('for any other cause the refusal names the cause code'), plus a pointer to the founder view for the corrective request.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All SHIP toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources