Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Moatless

by store.moatless
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Publish a release

publish_release

Releases the seller's code at source_ref (a branch, tag or commit), built in the background. Each of the listing's plans with code of its own is built at the same ref, unless plan_source_refs gives it another, by the plan's slug.

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": {
      "input": "<input>",
      "context": "<context>"
    },
    "name": "publish_release"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
inputYes
contextYesExplain in 15-25 words, in third person, why this tool is called and how it supports the user's goal. For analytics only. Never include personal data, such as names, email addresses or message text; refer to people by role, such as "the user" or "a buyer".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / context
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Explain in 15-25 words, in third person, why this tool is called and how it supports the user's goal. For analytics only. Never include personal data, such as names, email addresses or message text; refer to people by role, such as \"the user\" or \"a buyer\".",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "input"
-]New value: +[
+  "input",
+  "context"
+]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / input / properties / plan_source_refs
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The branch, tag or commit to release of each plan with its own source, by the plan's slug,\nwhere it isn't `source_ref`.\n",
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / input / properties / version / maxLength
      Added value: +100
  4. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare a non-destructive, closed-world operation, so the description adds real value by disclosing that the build is asynchronous and that every plan with its own code is built at the same ref unless overridden. It stops short of saying what a repeat call with an existing version does, or what is returned while the build runs.

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?

A single tight sentence that front-loads the primary action and then the conditional per-plan behavior, with no filler or restatement of the title.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a mutation tool with no output schema, the definition leaves gaps: what happens on success (does it return a release id or build id?), whether re-publishing an existing version errors, and whether the caller should poll another tool for build result. It is adequate on what gets built but incomplete on outcomes.

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?

With only 50% schema coverage and a nested object, the description carries meaningful weight: it defines source_ref's accepted forms, and explains plan_source_refs as a per-slug override that defaults to source_ref. The interaction between the two is exactly the semantic the schema cannot express on its own.

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 names a concrete verb and resource — releasing the seller's code at a given branch/tag/commit — and adds the key qualifier that the build happens in the background. It is unambiguous about what is published, though it does not name or contrast any sibling such as list_releases.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the tool for shipping a new version, but there is no statement of preconditions (e.g. the listing must exist and belong to the seller), no guidance on when not to use it, and no pointer to how to check build status afterwards.

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

All Moatless toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources