Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

rebase_feature_branch

Destructive

Rebase a feature branch by replaying its versions onto another branch, then open the interactive 3D stage to inspect the result.

Instructions

Rebase a feature branch. Opens Kiln's interactive inline 3D stage on the result (orbit/zoom panel in MCP Apps hosts; hosted sessions add a browser stage link).

Needs Kiln Pro.

INLINE 3D STAGE: on success this tool opens Kiln's interactive 3D stage — an inline viewer panel the user can orbit, zoom, and turn over — in hosts that render MCP Apps panels (Kiln's hosted connection attaches a browser stage link for hosts that don't). Oversized meshes are decimated automatically for the stage; the PNG preview is the floor, not the whole experience.

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": {
      "source_branch_id": "<source_branch_id>",
      "onto_branch_id": "<onto_branch_id>"
    },
    "name": "rebase_feature_branch"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
operatorNoWho is performing the rebase, recorded on the event. Omit it to use the caller's own identity: on Kiln's servers the signed-in account (a different name is refused), locally the declared operator or the computer's user name.
onto_branch_idYesId of the feature branch the replayed versions are appended to; its head ends at the source branch's head. Must be a different branch in the same graph.
source_branch_idYesId of the feature branch whose versions above the common ancestor are replayed, oldest first.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.5.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / onto_branch_id / description
      Added value: +"Id of the feature branch the replayed versions are appended to; its head ends at the source branch's head.  Must be a different branch in the same graph."
    • addedInput schema / properties / operator / description
      Added value: +"Who is performing the rebase, recorded on the event. Omit it to use the caller's own identity: on Kiln's servers the signed-in account (a different name is refused), locally the declared operator or the computer's user name."
    • addedInput schema / properties / source_branch_id / description
      Added value: +"Id of the feature branch whose versions above the common ancestor are replayed, oldest first."
  2. Addedv1.5.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

It adds genuine behavior beyond the annotations: entitlement gating (Kiln Pro), a side effect of opening an interactive 3D stage on success, a browser stage link in hosted sessions, and automatic decimation of oversized meshes. However, with destructiveHint=true, the description says nothing about what is destroyed or rewritten — the source branch's fate, whether history can be recovered via the reflog/undo siblings, or whether conflicts can abort the operation. Strong on viewer behavior, silent on the destructive core.

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 purpose is front-loaded, but the inline 3D stage is explained twice — once as a parenthetical in the opening sentence and again in the 'INLINE 3D STAGE' block, which repeats the orbit/zoom panel and browser link almost verbatim. Roughly two-thirds of the text is a repeated promotional aside that displaces the substantive rebase behavior.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive, history-rewriting mutation with no output schema, the description leaves critical gaps: what the tool returns, whether conflicts can arise mid-rebase, and what state the source branch ends in (the schema hints the target's head ends at the source head, but the description doesn't confirm or explain consequences). It is complete about the stage viewer and incomplete about everything that matters for calling it safely.

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 the parameter docs are detailed (operator identity rules, 'must be a different branch in the same graph', oldest-first replay). The description adds no parameter meaning at all, so baseline 3 applies — the schema does all the work.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The opening sentence 'Rebase a feature branch' restates the title almost verbatim and never explains what a rebase means here — the actual replay semantics only surface in the schema's parameter descriptions. It also does not distinguish itself from the near-identical siblings rebase_design_branch and rebase_preset_branch, or from merge_feature_branches, so an agent can't differentiate by description 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 a licensing prerequisite, not usage guidance. The description never says when to rebase versus merge (merge_feature_branches), when to check conflicts first (detect_feature_merge_conflicts), or when to prefer the design/preset rebase variants.

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