Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Google Play Console MCP

Google Play Console MCP

by abd3lraouf-studios
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Promote Release

promote_release

Move a release between Google Play tracks with a two-step preview and confirmation, using a token to approve the promotion.

Instructions

Promote a release from one track to another.

Two-step: preview first, then confirm with the preview's token.

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": {
      "package_name": "<package_name>",
      "from_track": "<from_track>",
      "to_track": "<to_track>",
      "version_code": "<version_code>"
    },
    "name": "promote_release"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
confirmNoSet True only after the user approved the preview
to_trackYesDestination track (alpha, beta, production)
from_trackYesSource track (internal, alpha, beta)
package_nameYesApp package name
version_codeYesVersion code to promote
confirmation_tokenNoThe token from that preview; never invent one
rollout_percentageNoRollout percentage for target track (0-100)

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of exposing behavior. It discloses a critical non-obvious trait: promotion is not immediate and requires a preview-then-confirm sequence with a token. It could additionally mention side effects like replacing or targeting a release, but the two-step requirement is genuinely useful and not visible from the schema alone.

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 two sentences with no filler. The core purpose comes first, and the crucial workflow constraint follows immediately. Every word earns its place.

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 schema already documents all parameters and an output schema exists, the description covers the key non-obvious workflow step. It would be slightly stronger if it explicitly said that the preview is obtained by calling promote_release with confirm=false, since no sibling preview tool exists. As written, the agent must infer that the same tool performs both steps.

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 all seven parameters thoroughly. The description adds some context by linking the confirmation_token to the preview step, but it does not materially add meaning beyond what the parameter descriptions already provide. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 specific action: 'Promote a release from one track to another.' This distinguishes it from siblings like halt_release, update_rollout, and deploy_app. The verb 'promote' plus the source/destination track relationship leaves little ambiguity about what the tool does.

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?

The description gives useful process guidance ('Two-step: preview first, then confirm with the preview's token') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like deploy_app or update_rollout. The usage context is implied rather than explicitly contrasted with sibling tools.

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