Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

cloud_push_branch

Destructive

Push a local design branch and its versions and sidecars to a remote to keep version history synchronized.

Instructions

Push a local branch (+ its versions + sidecars) to a remote.

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>",
      "branch_id": "<branch_id>"
    },
    "name": "cloud_push_branch"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
remoteNoRemote alias (default: ``"default"``). Default: "default".
branch_idYesLocal branch identifier (from ``list_design_branches``).
design_idYesThe design the branch belongs to.
make_room_forNoThe design the person chose to archive so this one fits (archived, never deleted). Default: "".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.5.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / branch_id / description
      Added value: +"Local branch identifier (from ``list_design_branches``)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / design_id / description
      Added value: +"The design the branch belongs to."
    • addedInput schema / properties / make_room_for
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The design the person chose to archive so this one fits (archived, never deleted). Default: \"\".",
+  "title": "Make Room For",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / remote / description
      Previous value: -"Default: \"default\"."New value: +"Remote alias (default: ``\"default\"``). Default: \"default\"."
  2. Addedv1.5.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description does add that versions and sidecars travel with the branch, but it never says whether the push overwrites the remote branch, how conflicts are handled, or whether it is force-like. The tier sentence ('Free door, tiered answer…') reads as marketing noise rather than behavior disclosure.

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?

The operational sentence is front-loaded and efficient. The tier sentence, however, consumes as much space as the real content and does not earn its place, making the whole definition feel padded.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a destructive one-way upload with no output schema, the definition covers what is pushed but omits remote-side effects, overwrite/conflict semantics, and what the caller gets back (e.g. commit ids or a success token). Annotations carry the destructive flag, so this is adequate rather than complete.

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 every parameter including remote, branch_id, design_id, and make_room_for is already documented in the schema. The description adds nothing beyond that – notably it does not explain the archive-to-make-room side effect or the default remote alias. A 3 baseline is appropriate.

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 first sentence states a specific verb and resource (push a local branch, with its versions and sidecars, to a remote), which is concrete enough for an agent to act on. It does not distinguish itself from the closely named siblings cloud_push_feature_branch, cloud_push_preset_branch, or cloud_push_release, so the agent must infer that this one is for plain design branches.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this versus cloud_push_feature_branch, cloud_push_preset_branch, or cloud_push_release, and no prerequisites such as needing a configured remote or prior auth. The second half is a pricing/tier blurb that gives no operational guidance about tool selection.

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