Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Cloady

Cloady

Official
by Cloady
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Checkout Git Branch

checkoutGitBranch
Destructive

Switches the working tree to a Git branch using git switch, handling remote branches and creating new ones. Refuses when uncommitted changes would be overwritten; works only on development apps.

Instructions

Switch the working tree to a branch with git switch, so the name is never read as a path. A branch that exists only on the remote is checked out tracking it, and create makes a new branch at the current commit. Refuses when uncommitted changes would be overwritten; other uncommitted changes come along. Works only on a development app: any other app answers 403 read_only. Runs git in the app's running container and returns its output.

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": {
      "workspaceSlug": "<workspaceSlug>",
      "appSlug": "<appSlug>"
    },
    "name": "checkoutGitBranch"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
envNo
regionNo
appSlugYes
requestBodyNoThe JSON request body.
workspaceSlugYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.18.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint false, destructiveHint true), it scopes the destruction precisely: it refuses when uncommitted changes would be overwritten while other local changes carry along. It also discloses the development-only restriction, the remote-tracking behavior, and that git runs in the app's running container and returns its output.

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?

Five tight sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and each subsequent sentence contributes distinct information (remote tracking, create, refusal conditions, env restriction, execution context) with no filler.

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 mutation tool with no output schema, it covers the safety profile, environment gating, and the fact that git output is returned. It is slightly thin on how the target app is selected (left to workspaceSlug/appSlug in the schema) and on what the returned output looks like.

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 only 20% schema coverage on 5 parameters, the description does add real meaning for 'branch' (never interpreted as a path) and 'create' (branch at current commit), and it implies env must be development. However, workspaceSlug, appSlug, and region are left entirely to the schema, so it only partly compensates for the coverage gap.

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 effect ('switch the working tree to a branch with git switch') on a specific resource, and clarifies the checkout semantics that distinguish it from siblings like listBranches, mergeGitBranch, rebaseGitBranch, or pullGitChanges.

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?

Explains when the create path applies and states the hard constraint that it only works on a development app (403 read_only otherwise). It does not explicitly name alternatives (e.g. merge/rebase) or say when not to use it, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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