Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

annotate_feature_branch

Destructive

Set or replace a human-readable purpose string on a Kiln feature branch, so agents and users can identify what each branch is for. Requires Kiln Pro.

Instructions

Set the human-readable purpose string on a branch.

Needs Kiln Pro.

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": {
      "branch_id": "<branch_id>",
      "annotation": "<annotation>"
    },
    "name": "annotate_feature_branch"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
branch_idYesId of the feature branch to describe.
annotationYesThe purpose text to store on the branch. It replaces any earlier annotation; an empty string clears it.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.5.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / annotation / description
      Added value: +"The purpose text to store on the branch.  It replaces any earlier annotation; an empty string clears it."
    • addedInput schema / properties / branch_id / description
      Added value: +"Id of the feature branch to describe."
  2. Addedv1.5.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the write/override profile is structurally visible. The description adds the real gating constraint ('Needs Kiln Pro') that annotations cannot express, but it never says in the description itself that an existing annotation is replaced or that an empty string clears it; that detail lives only in the parameter schema.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the access requirement. Nothing is wasted, though the second sentence is a fragment rather than an integrated clause.

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 simple two-parameter write tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description plus annotations convey what changes and what access is needed. The main omission is the overwrite/clear behavior, which is at least recoverable from the schema.

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 coverage is 100% and both parameters already carry descriptions, including the replace/clear semantics for 'annotation'. The tool description contributes no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 specific verb and resource: 'Set the human-readable purpose string on a branch.' An agent can tell this writes a descriptive label rather than renaming or restructuring the branch. It does not, however, distinguish itself from near-siblings such as rename_feature_branch, annotate_design_branch, or annotate_decoration_preset_branch.

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 'Needs Kiln Pro' line functions as a prerequisite an agent must check before calling, which is useful. However, there is no statement of when to choose this over rename_feature_branch or the design/decoration-preset annotation variants, and no guidance on when not to call it.

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