Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

cloud_push_preset_branch

Destructive

Upload a local decoration-preset branch to a remote to share preset changes across designs; requires Kiln Pro.

Instructions

Push a local decoration-preset branch 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": {
      "preset_id": "<preset_id>",
      "branch_id": "<branch_id>"
    },
    "name": "cloud_push_preset_branch"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
remoteNoRemote alias (default: ``"default"``). Default: "default".
branch_idYesLocal preset-branch identifier (from ``list_decoration_preset_branches``).
design_idNoOptional — portfolio-wide decorations (reusable across designs) leave this ``None``.
preset_idYesLocal decoration-preset identifier (from ``list_decoration_presets``).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.5.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / branch_id / description
      Added value: +"Local preset-branch identifier (from ``list_decoration_preset_branches``)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / design_id / description
      Added value: +"Optional — portfolio-wide decorations (reusable across designs) leave this ``None``."
    • addedInput schema / properties / preset_id / description
      Added value: +"Local decoration-preset identifier (from ``list_decoration_presets``)."
    • changedInput schema / properties / remote / description
      Previous value: -"Default: \"default\"."New value: +"Remote alias (default: ``\"default\"``). Default: \"default\"."
  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 openWorldHint=false, so the danger profile is covered. Beyond that the description only adds the Kiln Pro tier requirement; it says nothing about what happens when the remote branch already exists or diverges, whether the push overwrites remote history, or what errors to expect.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, with the prerequisite appended as a short constraint. Nothing is wasted and nothing important is buried.

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 four-parameter push with no output schema, the definition is adequate because annotations carry the safety signal and the schema carries the parameter detail. It is still thin on push semantics — upstream state, conflict/overwrite behavior, and whether the remote must already exist are all unstated.

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% and each parameter already documents its origin (list_decoration_presets, list_decoration_preset_branches) and the optional design_id case. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 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 — pushing a local decoration-preset branch to a remote — which distinguishes it from the pull and release siblings (cloud_pull_preset_branch, cloud_push_preset_release). It stops short of explicitly contrasting with cloud_push_branch or cloud_push_feature_branch, but the resource qualifier 'decoration-preset' does most of that work.

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?

'Needs Kiln Pro' is a useful prerequisite, but there is no guidance on when to push a branch versus a release, nor what state the local branch should be in first. The agent must infer the workflow from sibling names like create_decoration_preset_branch and list_decoration_preset_branches.

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