Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

cloud_clone_design

Bootstrap local storage for a remote-only design by cloning it from a configured remote, so you can work on the design locally.

Instructions

Bootstrap local storage for a remote-only design.

Free door, tiered answer — Free: Branch · merge · cherry-pick · undo, on the designs you keep · Pro: Branch · merge · cherry-pick · undo, on every design · Business: ✓ · Enterprise: ✓.

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": {
      "design_id": "<design_id>"
    },
    "name": "cloud_clone_design"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
remoteNoRemote alias, as registered with ``cloud_remote_add`` (default: ``"default"``). Default: "default".
design_idYesThe id of the design in the account to bring down.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.5.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / design_id / description
      Added value: +"The id of the design in the account to bring down."
    • changedInput schema / properties / remote / description
      Previous value: -"Default: \"default\"."New value: +"Remote alias, as registered with ``cloud_remote_add`` (default: ``\"default\"``). Default: \"default\"."
  2. Addedv1.5.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate a non-destructive, non-read-only operation, and the description adds that it bootstraps local storage from a remote-only design. It does not disclose whether existing local files are overwritten, what local artifacts are created, or what happens if the design is already present; the tier sentence adds no behavioral context.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The first sentence is front-loaded and relevant, but the second sentence is an irrelevant pricing/tier matrix ('Free door, tiered answer') that does not help an agent decide or invoke the tool. Removing it would make the definition cleaner.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple two-parameter clone tool, the first sentence plus annotations and schema cover the basic purpose, but the description omits the local overwrite and return behavior and muddies the definition with unrelated tier information. It is not complete enough for a mutation operation that could affect local state.

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 are documented in the schema, including the remote alias default. The description adds no syntax, format, or constraint details beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description says it bootstraps local storage for a remote-only design, which implies a clone-down operation, but it never uses 'clone' or 'download' explicitly and does not distinguish this from cloud_clone_feature, cloud_clone_preset, or cloud_pull_branch. The title helps, but the description itself is vague jargon rather than a precise verb-and-resource statement.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The only contextual hint is 'remote-only design,' with no statement of when to choose this over cloud_clone_feature, cloud_clone_preset, cloud_pull_branch, or other sync tools. The tier matrix describes plan availability, not usage 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