Google Play MCP

complete_rollout

Finish a staged rollout by releasing the app to 100% of users on a specified track, with an optional dry run to preview changes before publishing.

Instructions

Finish a staged rollout: release to 100% of users (status 'completed'). Track defaults to production. Gated on production by PLAY_MCP_ALLOW_PRODUCTION_RELEASE. Set dryRun:true to preview.

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": {
      "packageName": "<packageName>"
    },
    "name": "complete_rollout"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`track`	No	Default 'production'
`dryRun`	No	Preview only: open a temporary edit, apply, validate, then delete it. Nothing is published (default false). Ignored when editId is set.
`editId`	No	Optional: an open edit from insert_edit. The change is applied inside that edit and NOT committed — batch several changes, then call commit_edit.
`packageName`	Yes	Application id (package name), e.g. com.example.app
`versionCode`	No	Default: the staged release
`changesNotSentForReview`	No	Commit option: keep the changes out of review until sent from Play Console. Google requires this for some apps and rejects it for others — set it only if a commit error asks for it.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden; it discloses the production-release environment gate and points to dryRun for previewing, which are real behavioral facts absent from structured data. It omits whether the 100% release is irreversible and what happens on failure, leaving a meaningful gap for a mutation of this weight.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and outcome, then preconditions and preview option. Every sentence earns its place; only the redundant track default is filler.

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 6-parameter mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential gate and preview path, leaving return values to be discovered. It could be clearer that without editId the change is committed immediately, but overall it is sufficient to call correctly.

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 each parameter already has a detailed description, including dryRun, editId, and changesNotSentForReview. The description's mentions of track defaulting to production and dryRun preview simply restate the schema, adding no new meaning; baseline 3 applies.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a concrete verb ('Finish'), the resource ('a staged rollout'), and the exact resulting state ('release to 100% of users, status completed'). This is unmistakably different from halt_rollout, resume_rollout, and set_rollout_fraction, so an agent can select it without opening the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives clear context for when this applies (finishing a staged rollout) plus operational preconditions: production track default and the PLAY_MCP_ALLOW_PRODUCTION_RELEASE gate. It does not explicitly contrast with set_rollout_fraction at 100%, which is the nearest ambiguity, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server