Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

list_feature_branches

Read-only

Lists all live branches for a feature and can optionally include retired branches; requires Kiln Pro.

Instructions

List all branches (optionally including retired) for a feature.

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>"
    },
    "name": "list_feature_branches"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
feature_idYesId of the feature whose branches are listed.
include_retiredNoWhen true, retired branches are listed too. Off by default, so only live branches appear. Default: false.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.5.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / feature_id / description
      Added value: +"Id of the feature whose branches are listed."
    • changedInput schema / properties / include_retired / description
      Previous value: -"Default: false."New value: +"When true, retired branches are listed too. Off by default, so only live branches appear. Default: false."
  2. Addedv1.5.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnly, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the description only needs to add context. It does so with the Kiln Pro plan requirement and the fact that retired branches are excluded unless requested, both of which the annotations and schema titles do not convey on their own.

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 zero filler and the core action front-loaded. The trailing prerequisite sentence is a fragment, but it carries real information rather than padding.

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 clear annotations, the description covers action, scope, and plan gating without needing an output schema. Only the lack of return-shape or ordering hints and the silent alternative siblings keep it from being fully 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 feature_id and include_retired are already fully documented, including the false default. The phrase "optionally including retired" merely mirrors include_retired and adds no format, range, or edge-case detail beyond the schema.

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 all branches ... for a feature" gives a specific verb and a scoped resource, which separates it from siblings like list_design_branches and list_feature_releases. It stops short of naming a sibling, so an agent still has to infer why it should pick this over list_features or get_feature.

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 "Needs Kiln Pro" prerequisite is implicit guidance about eligibility, and "optionally including retired" hints at the default scope. There is no explicit when-to-use statement and no alternative tool is named for the case where the agent lacks a feature_id or wants design branches instead.

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