Skip to main content
Glama

shopify_publish_theme

DestructiveIdempotent

Publish an approved, immutable Shopify theme release candidate to production after verifying the exact preimage digest and approval, ensuring only the governed version goes live.

Instructions

Publish a ready, immutable UNPUBLISHED release candidate. This operation is fail-closed until Spring can consume a server-retained duplicate-candidate content proof; role alone and caller-supplied digests are never publication authority. Once that custody bridge exists, provider readback verifies Shopify returns MAIN. The connector also re-reads the exact approved theme preimage immediately before dispatch. This live write remains approval-gated.

Args:
    theme_id (required): UNPUBLISHED candidate theme ID (numeric or GID).
    expected_preimage_sha256 (required): Exact governed get_theme lifecycle digest approved for publication.
    project_id: Authenticated Project UUID.
    project_ref: Exact project correlation reference.
    connector_account_ref: Project-bound connector account alias.
    idempotency_key: Stable business-action identity.
    effect: Claimed read or write effect; Spring verifies it.
    approval_ref: Approved platform task UUID when resuming a write.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
effectNo
theme_idNo
project_idNo
project_refNo
approval_refNo
idempotency_keyNo
connector_account_refNo
expected_preimage_sha256No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Addedv0.1.1

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already signal a destructive, non-readonly, idempotent write, but the description adds substantial behavioral detail beyond them: fail-closed semantics, caller-supplied digests and role alone being insufficient, server-retained custody proof, provider readback verification that Shopify returns MAIN, and re-reading the approved theme preimage before dispatch. No contradiction with annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with purpose and ends with a clear Args block, but the middle prose is dense with unexplained jargon like 'Spring', 'custody bridge', 'provider readback', and 'MAIN'. It conveys important governance context, yet several concepts are repeated and could be tightened without losing meaning.

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 high-complexity mutating tool, the description covers prerequisites, approval gating, idempotency, verification behavior, and all parameter meanings. Since an output schema exists, return-value details are not required. It stops short of fully explaining how approval_ref is obtained or what values effect may take, but overall it is substantially complete.

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 description coverage is 0% and all parameters are opaque nullable strings, so the description carries the full burden. It provides meaningful semantics for all eight parameters, marking theme_id and expected_preimage_sha256 as contextually required and explaining idempotency_key, effect, approval_ref, and project correlation fields. Minor gaps: 'required' in the description conflicts with the schema marking all parameters optional, and allowed values for effect are not specified.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Publish a ready, immutable UNPUBLISHED release candidate.' It clearly identifies this as a theme publication action and distinguishes it from nearby tools like shopify_publish_product, shopify_update_theme, and shopify_duplicate_theme by emphasizing the UNPUBLISHED and approval-gated nature.

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?

The description gives strong usage conditions: only UNPUBLISHED release candidates, approval-gated live write, and a required governed digest from get_theme. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance, but the conditions are clear enough to route an agent to the correct context.

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

Install Server

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/RPasquale/lightbulb-mcp'

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