Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

sign_feature_release

Creates an Ed25519-signed release manifest that pins a feature version's content, so teams can record and verify 3D design releases. Requires Kiln Pro.

Instructions

Produce an Ed25519-signed release manifest over the feature's content.

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>",
      "feature_version_id": "<feature_version_id>",
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "sign_feature_release"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesThe release name (e.g. ``1.0.0``). A name already used for this feature is refused (``FEATURE_RELEASE_EXISTS``).
signed_byNoWho signs. 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.
feature_idYesId of the feature being released.
branch_nameNoName of the branch the version was released from, recorded in the manifest. Omit it to record none.
feature_version_idYesId of the feature version the release pins. It must belong to ``feature_id`` and have content; a version with no parameters and no module body is refused.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changedv1.5.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / branch_name / description
      Added value: +"Name of the branch the version was released from, recorded in the manifest.  Omit it to record none."
    • addedInput schema / properties / feature_id / description
      Added value: +"Id of the feature being released."
    • addedInput schema / properties / feature_version_id / description
      Added value: +"Id of the feature version the release pins.  It must belong to ``feature_id`` and have content; a version with no parameters and no module body is refused."
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Added value: +"The release name (e.g. ``1.0.0``).  A name already used for this feature is refused (``FEATURE_RELEASE_EXISTS``)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / signed_by / description
      Added value: +"Who signs.  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."
  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 mark this as a non-readonly, non-destructive, closed-world write, so the description's main added value is the Ed25519 algorithm and the Kiln Pro gating. It does not disclose whether signing is one-shot/immutable, whether the release must already exist, or what happens on re-signing — meaningful gaps for a signing operation.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action and artifact, with the licensing constraint called out separately. No wasted wording.

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?

With no output schema and no annotation-level detail about the manifest, the definition leaves the result and the release state after signing (does it create a release record? does it need list_feature_releases first?) unexplained. Adequate to invoke, thin for a signing workflow.

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 the schema already explains feature_id, feature_version_id, name, signed_by, and branch_name including refusal codes. The description adds nothing about parameters beyond that baseline.

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?

States a specific verb and artifact: 'Produce an Ed25519-signed release manifest over the feature's content.' The agent knows it creates a signature/manifest, but the description never contrasts it with its close siblings verify_feature_release, sign_design_release, or cloud_push_feature_release.

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' is the only usage signal; it names a tier prerequisite but not when to sign versus verify or push a release. Sibling selection is left to inference from the name alone.

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