Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

promote_kit_piece

Promotes a single kit piece into its own standalone design while preserving lineage; requires Kiln Pro.

Instructions

Promote one kit piece to its OWN standalone design — lineage intact.

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": {
      "design_id": "<design_id>",
      "new_design_id": "<new_design_id>"
    },
    "name": "promote_kit_piece"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoOptional display name for the new design. Default: "".
kit_idNoOptional specific kit (default: the design's current active kit). Default: "".
design_idYesThe design whose kit holds the piece.
piece_labelNoWhich piece, by its displayed label ("2", "3.1"). Default: "".
new_design_idYesThe id for the promoted standalone design (must not already be this design).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changedv1.5.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / design_id / description
      Added value: +"The design whose kit holds the piece."
    • changedInput schema / properties / kit_id / description
      Previous value: -"Default: \"\"."New value: +"Optional specific kit (default: the design's current active kit). Default: \"\"."
    • changedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Previous value: -"Default: \"\"."New value: +"Optional display name for the new design. Default: \"\"."
    • addedInput schema / properties / new_design_id / description
      Added value: +"The id for the promoted standalone design (must not already be this design)."
    • changedInput schema / properties / piece_label / description
      Previous value: -"Default: \"\"."New value: +"Which piece, by its displayed label (\"2\", \"3.1\"). 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 readOnlyHint=false with destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the write-but-not-destructive profile is known. The description adds real value by disclosing the tier requirement and that lineage is preserved, but it omits the key behavioral question for a promotion: whether the piece is removed or left in the source kit.

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 short lines: the core action and result are front-loaded, and the prerequisite is compressed into a separate sentence. Nothing is wasted.

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 five-parameter mutation with no output schema, the definition covers the action, the lineage guarantee and the plan gate, but leaves the fate of the source kit piece and the returned identifier unexplained. It is adequate to attempt a call but not to predict the side effects.

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 five parameters (including design_id, kit_id, piece_label and new_design_id) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax, label format, or defaulting detail beyond that, 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 (promote) and resource (a kit piece) and the outcome (a standalone design with lineage intact), which is concrete enough that an agent can distinguish it from siblings like plan_kit_plates or advise_kit_scale. It stops short of a 5 because 'kit piece' is only inferable from context, not defined here.

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' line is a genuine gating prerequisite, so the description does say something about when the tool is callable. It gives no guidance on when to prefer this over related kit or design tools, and no note on preconditions such as the piece already belonging to an active kit.

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