Skip to main content
Glama

create_release

Publish an uploaded app bundle to a Google Play track using explicit version codes, replacing the current release for that track.

Instructions

Create a release on a track from explicit version codes, replacing whatever releases that track currently has. Use this to ship an already-uploaded bundle: get the version codes from list_bundles or list_apks first. Use promote_release instead when moving an existing release between tracks. Use validate_only first to check the change without committing.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
trackYesTrack to release on: 'internal', 'alpha', 'beta', 'production' or a custom track
statusNoRelease status. Defaults to 'inProgress' when user_fraction is given, otherwise 'completed'. Use 'draft' to stage a release without publishing it.
package_nameNoApp package name, e.g. 'com.acme.app' (defaults to GOOGLE_PLAY_PACKAGE_NAME)
release_nameNoRelease name shown in the Play Console, e.g. '1.4.0 (415)'
release_notesNoRelease notes per locale, e.g. [{language:'en-US',text:'Bug fixes'}]. Defaults to the source release's notes.
user_fractionNoStaged rollout fraction between 0 and 1 exclusive, e.g. 0.1 for 10%. Omit to release to all users.
validate_onlyNoDry run: validate the change and discard the edit instead of committing it
version_codesYesVersion codes of the bundles/APKs to release, as strings, e.g. ['415']. Get them from list_bundles or list_apks.
country_targetingNoRestrict the release to specific countries. Omit to keep the source targeting.
in_app_update_priorityNoIn-app update priority from 0 (default) to 5 (most urgent), read by the Play In-App Updates API. Omit to keep the source value.
changes_not_sent_for_reviewNoCommit without sending the changes for review (only for apps where changes are reviewed separately)
Install Server

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description discloses that the tool replaces existing releases, implying destructive behavior. It also mentions validate_only to check without committing, so potential side effects are partially transparent. However, it does not detail all mutation consequences or authorization requirements, though annotations are absent.

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?

The description is concise, consisting of three sentences that cover purpose, usage, and alternatives without fluff. It is well-structured and each sentence serves a clear function.

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?

Given the tool's complexity, the description covers key aspects: action, prerequisites, alternatives, and safe validation. It does not explain every parameter, but the schema handles that. Overall, it provides enough context for a user to understand the tool's role and basic usage.

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?

The schema fully documents each parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explicitly instructing to obtain version codes from list_bundles or list_apks and mentions validate_only, which enhances understanding of these parameters. It does not cover all parameters but adds context beyond the schema.

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?

The description clearly states the tool creates a release on a track from explicit version codes and replaces existing releases. It distinguishes from promote_release by specifying the difference, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

The description explicitly states when to use this tool (to ship an already-uploaded bundle), how to get prerequisites (list_bundles or list_apks), and provides clear alternatives (promote_release) and a safe-check option (validate_only). This gives complete usage guidance.

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

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/OrellBuehler/play-console-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server