Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

cloud_push_feature_branch

Destructive

Push a local feature branch and its versions to a remote so Kiln Pro users can sync branch history to the cloud.

Instructions

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

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": {
      "feature_id": "<feature_id>",
      "branch_id": "<branch_id>"
    },
    "name": "cloud_push_feature_branch"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
remoteNoRemote alias (default: ``"default"``). Default: "default".
branch_idYesLocal feature-branch identifier (from ``list_feature_branches``).
design_idNoOptional — scope the feature to a specific design in the cloud-side grouping. Features published portfolio-wide (reusable across designs) leave this ``None``.
feature_idYesLocal feature identifier (from ``list_features``).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.5.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / branch_id / description
      Added value: +"Local feature-branch identifier (from ``list_feature_branches``)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / design_id / description
      Added value: +"Optional — scope the feature to a specific design in the cloud-side grouping.  Features published portfolio-wide (reusable across designs) leave this ``None``."
    • addedInput schema / properties / feature_id / description
      Added value: +"Local feature identifier (from ``list_features``)."
    • 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 and readOnlyHint=false, so the mutation risk is covered structurally. The description contributes a genuine extra fact not present in annotations, the Kiln Pro entitlement gate, plus the note that versions travel with the branch; however, it does not say whether a remote branch is created or overwritten, how conflicts or rejection are handled, or whether the push is forced.

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 with the action front-loaded and the prerequisite demoted to a second line; nothing is wasted. The parenthetical '(+ its versions)' is slightly awkward phrasing but does carry real information about payload scope.

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 cloud mutation with no output schema, the definition covers the action, the payload, and the entitlement requirement, and annotations cover the safety profile. It remains thin on outcome: no mention of what the remote state looks like afterward, no failure modes, and no routing guidance in a crowded push/pull family.

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 all four parameters (remote, branch_id, design_id, feature_id) are already documented including their source list_* tools and defaults. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, which is acceptable at full coverage but does not exceed baseline.

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: push a local feature branch plus its versions to a remote. The scope differs meaningfully from siblings like cloud_push_branch, cloud_push_release, and cloud_push_preset_branch, but it never names those alternatives, so the agent must infer the boundary from the tool 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 Guidelines2/5

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

'Needs Kiln Pro' is the only contextual signal, and it is a prerequisite rather than when-to-use guidance. The sibling set contains several near-identical push tools (cloud_push_branch, cloud_push_feature_release, cloud_push_preset_branch) plus the inverse cloud_pull_feature_branch, and the description offers no rule for choosing among them.

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