Skip to main content
Glama

Labelixa

by com.labelixa
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Validate EPL

epl_validate
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lint EPL/EPL2 label code and return positioned findings with severity as JSON. Checks the command set Labelixa implements from the EPL2 manual — a clean result is not a guarantee that a specific printer accepts the job. Run this before epl_preview; if you are not sure which language the code is, call language_detect first.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
eplYesRaw EPL/EPL2 code

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
summaryYes
diagnosticsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • removedOutput schema / properties / diagnostics / items / properties / mesaj
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Human-readable message in the requested language",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / diagnostics / items / properties / message
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Human-readable message in the requested language",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedOutput schema / properties / ozet
      Removed value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "error": {
-      "type": "integer"
-    },
-    "info": {
-      "type": "integer"
-    },
-    "toplam": {
-      "type": "integer"
-    },
-    "warning": {
-      "type": "integer"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "toplam",
-    "error",
-    "warning",
-    "info"
-  ],
-  "type": "object"
-}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / summary
      Added value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "error": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "info": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "total": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "warning": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "total",
+    "error",
+    "warning",
+    "info"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
    • changedOutput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "diagnostics",
-  "ozet"
-]New value: +[
+  "diagnostics",
+  "summary"
+]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "diagnostics": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "code": {
+            "description": "Stable diagnostic code, e.g. ZPL0002",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "col": {
+            "type": "integer"
+          },
+          "end_col": {
+            "type": "integer"
+          },
+          "end_line": {
+            "type": "integer"
+          },
+          "line": {
+            "type": "integer"
+          },
+          "mesaj": {
+            "description": "Human-readable message in the requested language",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "message_key": {
+            "description": "i18n key for the message",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "severity": {
+            "enum": [
+              "error",
+              "warning",
+              "info"
+            ],
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "code",
+          "severity",
+          "line",
+          "col"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "ozet": {
+      "properties": {
+        "error": {
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "info": {
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "toplam": {
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "warning": {
+          "type": "integer"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "toplam",
+        "error",
+        "warning",
+        "info"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "diagnostics",
+    "ozet"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive). The description adds a genuinely non-obvious scope caveat — validation only covers the command set Labelixa implements from the EPL2 manual, so a clean result does not guarantee printer acceptance. It does not cover error behavior or severity levels in depth, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with what the tool does, then the scope limitation, then the workflow guidance. Every sentence earns its place with no restatement of the title or schema.

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

Completeness5/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the description still briefly characterizes the output (positioned findings with severity). For a one-parameter read-only linter, everything an agent needs to call it and interpret the result is present.

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?

There is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage ('Raw EPL/EPL2 code'), so the schema already carries the parameter meaning. The description adds no format, encoding, or size guidance beyond it, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the work.

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 specific verb (lint/validate) and resource (EPL/EPL2 label code) and names the output form (positioned findings with severity as JSON). It clearly distinguishes itself from the sibling validators (zpl_validate, cpcl_validate, tspl_validate) by language scope.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit sequencing guidance: 'Run this before epl_preview' and a routing rule 'if you are not sure which language the code is, call language_detect first.' Both the when-to-use and the alternative path are named, leaving nothing to inference.

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

All Labelixa toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources