Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

cloud_list_remote_releases

Read-only

List signed releases published to a remote for a given design ID, so you can review available published versions before download or deployment. Requires Kiln Pro.

Instructions

List signed releases published to the remote for design_id.

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

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
remoteNoRemote alias, as registered with ``cloud_remote_add`` (default: ``"default"``). Default: "default".
design_idYesThe design whose published releases to list.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.5.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / design_id / description
      Added value: +"The design whose published releases to list."
    • 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

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real context beyond that: results are limited to *signed* releases only, and the tool requires a Kiln Pro entitlement. It says nothing about result volume, pagination, or what an empty remote returns.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scope, with the entitlement caveat second. Nothing is padded or repeated from the schema.

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 two-parameter read-only list tool with full schema coverage and annotations, the description is close to sufficient: it identifies the resource, the scoping key, the signature filter, and the tier gate. The only material omission is disambiguation from the many other release- and remote-listing siblings.

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% for both parameters, including the remote alias default and its link to cloud_remote_add, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only restates design_id as the scoping key and adds no format or aliasing detail beyond structured fields.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: list signed releases published to the remote for a given design_id. That is clearly more specific than a bare name restatement, but it never contrasts itself with near-identical siblings such as list_design_releases, cloud_list_remote_branches, or cloud_remote_list, so an agent must infer the distinction from the name alone.

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 phrase 'published to the remote' implies usage (inspect what has been pushed to a remote), and 'Needs Kiln Pro' states a prerequisite. However, there is no explicit when-to-use versus when-not guidance and no routing to the local-release or branch-listing alternatives, which several siblings clearly compete with.

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