FeatureOS

Create changelog

create_changelog

Create a new changelog in the organization. Pass label_ids to attach labels (from list_changelog_labels).

Creates a draft by default. Publishing now (published=true) or scheduling it (scheduled_published_at) puts it live on the public changelog, so it needs the user's approval: without confirm=true nothing is created and the pending change is returned.

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": {
      "title": "<title>"
    },
    "name": "create_changelog"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`title`	Yes	Title of the changelog (also used to generate the slug).
`locale`	No	Language code (defaults to 'en').	en
`confirm`	No	Required with published=true or scheduled_published_at. Set true ONLY after the user has explicitly approved this exact change in the conversation. Without it the tool changes nothing and returns the pending change for the user to approve.
`label_ids`	No	Changelog label (tag) IDs from list_changelog_labels, as a JSON array of integers, e.g. [1779, 1781].
`published`	No	Set to True to publish the changelog immediately. Requires confirm=true.
`description`	No	Details of the changelog. Accepts HTML.
`original_id`	No	ID of the original changelog when creating a translation in another language.
`feature_requests_ids`	No	List of feature request IDs to link to this changelog. Pass as a JSON array of integers, e.g. [123, 456]. Do NOT pass a quoted string.
`scheduled_published_at`	No	Future date/time to schedule publication (ISO 8601, e.g. 2026-11-01T09:00:00Z). Requires confirm=true.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`changelog`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true. The description adds the critical two-step behavior: without confirm=true nothing is created and a pending change is returned instead — an approval gate the agent cannot infer from annotations. It also discloses the externally visible consequence of publishing ('puts it live on the public changelog'), which explains the openWorldHint in actionable terms.

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?

Two short paragraphs, front-loaded with purpose then the publish/approval caveat. Every sentence carries information, though the confirm/publish explanation overlaps with what the schema already says, making it slightly redundant.

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?

For a 9-parameter mutation tool with an output schema available, the description covers the high-risk unknowns: draft default, publication side effects, and the approval gate. Return values are handled by the output schema and the pending-change return is still noted, so nothing essential is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents confirm, published, scheduled_published_at, and label_ids, including the confirm-gating rule. The description's parameter content largely restates that (label_ids from list_changelog_labels, confirm requirement) rather than adding new semantics such as scheduling timezone rules or label conflicts. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Create a new changelog in the organization.' It also states the default outcome (a draft) versus the publish/schedule path, which disambiguates behavior an agent could not guess from the name. It does not explicitly name update_changelog as the alternative for editing existing entries, which keeps it a notch below a 5.

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?

Gives concrete usage conditions: default behavior is draft creation, and passing published=true or scheduled_published_at switches to a live-publication path that requires user approval. It also routes the agent to list_changelog_labels for obtaining label_ids. No explicit 'do not use this when…' clause, but the guidance is clear.

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

All FeatureOS tools Inspect

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.