Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

list_design_branches

Read-only

List branches for a specific design so you can review version history and choose which branch to continue, merge, or inspect.

Instructions

List the branches of a 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": "list_design_branches"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
design_idYesTarget design.
expand_kitsNoList kit piece branches individually in ``branches`` instead of the collapsed groups. Default: false.
include_retiredNoInclude branches the user previously retired (records preserved for audit). Default: false.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.5.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / design_id / description
      Added value: +"Target design."
    • changedInput schema / properties / expand_kits / description
      Previous value: -"Default: false."New value: +"List kit piece branches individually in ``branches`` instead of the collapsed groups. Default: false."
    • changedInput schema / properties / include_retired / description
      Previous value: -"Default: false."New value: +"Include branches the user previously retired (records preserved for audit). Default: false."
  2. Addedv1.5.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
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 the safety profile is covered. The description contributes the tier-gating detail (branch/merge/cherry-pick/undo availability by Free/Pro/Business/Enterprise), which is real behavioral context, but it never mentions pagination, ordering, or how retired branches appear by default.

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 tight and front-loaded, but the second is a long, oddly punctuated pricing blurb with checkmark glyphs that reads as marketing copy rather than tooling guidance. It occupies most of the description's length while contributing only a small amount of usable information.

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 read-only list tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the essentials are present. Still missing is any hint of the return shape (collapsed branch groups vs individual kit pieces) that the expand_kits flag implies, which would help the agent interpret results.

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 both optional parameters (expand_kits, include_retired) are documented in the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds nothing about how expand_kits changes the returned grouping or what retire/audit semantics mean for include_retired.

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?

"List the branches of a design" gives a specific verb and resource, so the operation is unambiguous. It does not, however, distinguish this from close siblings such as list_feature_branches, list_decoration_preset_branches, or show_branch_history, leaving the agent to infer the boundary.

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 guidance on when to pick this over the sibling branch-listing tools, nor any prerequisite or exclusion noted. The second sentence discusses plan tiers, which is availability information rather than usage routing, so it does not compensate.

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