Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

retire_feature_branch

Destructive

Retires a feature branch, preserves its records, and frees the branch name; requires Kiln Pro and team admin role for team-owned features.

Instructions

Retire a branch — preserves records, frees the name.

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": {
      "branch_id": "<branch_id>"
    },
    "name": "retire_feature_branch"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
branch_idYesId of the feature branch to retire. On a feature owned by a team the caller must hold that team's admin role, or the retire is refused.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.5.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / branch_id / description
      Added value: +"Id of the feature branch to retire.  On a feature owned by a team the caller must hold that team's admin role, or the retire is refused."
  2. Addedv1.5.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false; the description adds the important nuance that underlying records survive and the branch name becomes reusable, plus the tier gate. It stops short of saying whether the retire is reversible, what happens to open pull requests or releases tied to the branch, or whether the id remains queryable.

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 fragments with the outcome stated first and the prerequisite second; nothing is wasted. Slightly terse for a destructive operation, but well front-loaded.

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 single-parameter, destructive mutation with full schema coverage and no output schema, the essential facts (what is kept, what is freed, tier requirement) are present. Missing are reversibility and side effects on dependent artifacts like releases or pull requests she points to.

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 coverage is 100% and the branch_id description already documents the team-admin requirement. The description adds nothing about the identifier format or scope, so schema does the heavy lifting and the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 pairs a specific verb ("Retire") with the resource ("branch") and states two concrete effects: records are preserved and the name is freed. That distinguishes it from a plain delete, though it never names which sibling (delete_feature, archive_feature) it is the alternative to.

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" gives a real prerequisite that helps an agent avoid a failed call, but there is no explicit guidance on when to retire versus delete_feature, archive_feature, or rollback_feature, nor on what state the branch must be in.

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