app-publish-mcp

google_promote_release

Promote a Google Play app release from one track to another, such as beta to production, by specifying the package, edit, version codes, and source and target tracks.

Instructions

Promote a release from one track to another (e.g. beta → production)

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>",
      "editId": "<editId>",
      "fromTrack": "<fromTrack>",
      "toTrack": "<toTrack>",
      "versionCodes": "<versionCodes>"
    },
    "name": "google_promote_release"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`editId`	Yes	Edit ID
`toTrack`	Yes	Target track ID, including custom or form-factor tracks
`fromTrack`	Yes	Source track ID returned by google_list_tracks
`packageName`	Yes	Android package name
`releaseNotes`	No
`userFraction`	No	Staged rollout fraction (not supported for internal)
`versionCodes`	Yes	Complete version-code set identifying the source release
`countryTargeting`	No	Country targeting for an inProgress production rollout
`inAppUpdatePriority`	No	In-app update priority from 0 (lowest) to 5 (highest)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed13 schema fields changedv0.7.0Oct 25, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / countryTargeting

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "description": "Country targeting for an inProgress production rollout",
+  "properties": {
+    "countries": {
+      "default": [],
+      "items": {
+        "pattern": "^[A-Z]{2}$",
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "includeRestOfWorld": {
+      "default": false,
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

changedInput schema / properties / fromTrack / description

Previous value: -"Source track"New value: +"Source track ID returned by google_list_tracks"

removedInput schema / properties / fromTrack / enum

Removed value: -[
-  "internal",
-  "alpha",
-  "beta"
-]

addedInput schema / properties / fromTrack / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```

addedInput schema / properties / inAppUpdatePriority

Added value: +{
+  "description": "In-app update priority from 0 (lowest) to 5 (highest)",
+  "maximum": 5,
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

changedInput schema / properties / toTrack / description

Previous value: -"Target track"New value: +"Target track ID, including custom or form-factor tracks"

removedInput schema / properties / toTrack / enum

Removed value: -[
-  "alpha",
-  "beta",
-  "production"
-]

addedInput schema / properties / toTrack / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```

changedInput schema / properties / userFraction / description

Previous value: -"Staged rollout fraction for production"New value: +"Staged rollout fraction (not supported for internal)"

addedInput schema / properties / userFraction / exclusiveMaximum
```
Added value: +1
```
addedInput schema / properties / userFraction / exclusiveMinimum
```
Added value: +0
```

addedInput schema / properties / versionCodes

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Complete version-code set identifying the source release",
+  "items": {
+    "pattern": "^[1-9]\\d*$",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "minItems": 1,
+  "type": "array"
+}

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "packageName",
-  "editId",
-  "fromTrack",
-  "toTrack"
-]New value: +[
+  "packageName",
+  "editId",
+  "fromTrack",
+  "toTrack",
+  "versionCodes"
+]

First observedv0.3.1Mar 19, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says the tool promotes a release between tracks, but it does not explain side effects, permissions, reversibility, edit lifecycle requirements, or what happens to the source release. For a mutation tool with no annotations, this is a significant gap.

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?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The example is compact and immediately useful. It is appropriately sized for a tool whose parameters are documented by the schema.

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?

The tool is a complex mutation with nine parameters, a nested object, no annotations, and no output schema. The description does not cover the edit lifecycle, required commit/validation context, or behavioral consequences of promotion. Given that richness and the absence of structured behavioral metadata, the description is not complete enough.

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 89%, so the schema already documents nearly all parameters, including fromTrack, toTrack, versionCodes, userFraction, and countryTargeting. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the example. With high schema coverage, a 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 states a specific verb and resource: promoting a release from one track to another. The beta-to-production example makes the operation concrete. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools such as google_create_release or google_halt_release, so it falls short of a 5.

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 description implies usage by naming the operation and giving a beta-to-production example. It does not state when this tool should be used instead of alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. The guidance is therefore implied rather than explicit.

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

Deploy Server