Skip to main content
Glama

SimplyPrint: 3D Print Farm Management

by io.simplyprint

list_files

Read-onlyIdempotent

List files and folders in the user's SimplyPrint storage. With pid set, only returns files compatible with that printer (full compatibility check). With global_search=true (default), searches recursively across all folders.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fNoFolder id to list (0 or omitted = root)
limitNoCap on returned files (1-500). Useful with sort_by for "5 largest files" or "10 most recent".
searchNoFilename substring search. Matches with or without extension — "Schleife oben 1_PLA_1h4m" and "Schleife oben 1_PLA_1h4m.3mf" both find the same file.
compactNoKeep at default true. Returns minimal data tuned for AI context. Only set to false if you specifically need fields the compact view drops, and then pair with limit to keep the response small.
sort_byNoSort files by this field (folders are not affected). Default: repository order (user's saved files-page sort).
sort_dirNoSort direction; default desc (newest/largest first).
has_gcodeNotrue = only files with a parsed G-code analysis (printable); false = only non-printable files (models, etc.)
printer_idNoOnly return files compatible with this printer (full compatibility check, not just model)
global_searchNoIf true (default), search recursively across all folders instead of only the current one

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond those: the default recursive search behavior, the 'full compatibility check' (not just model), and the compact data mode tuned for AI context. This enhances transparency without contradicting annotations.

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 brief (three sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence. It covers the most important variations without redundancy, earning its place with no wasted words.

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?

While there is no output schema, the description sufficiently conveys the behavior of a file-listing tool with search and compatibility options. It does not detail the return structure, but that is a minor gap given the tool's straightforward purpose and the rich parameter schema. The description is complete enough for an AI agent to select and invoke it 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 the schema descriptions are detailed for every parameter. The tool description adds a bit about pid and global_search, but these largely duplicate what the schema already states. Thus, the description provides marginal value beyond the schema, staying at baseline 3.

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?

The description uses a specific verb and resource ('List files and folders in the user's SimplyPrint storage'), and adds distinctive scope details: printer compatibility via pid and recursive search via global_search. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like get_folder, list_print_jobs, or delete_file.

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?

It provides clear context for when to use the tool and its variants: setting pid for printer compatibility and global_search for recursive searching. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools, so it lacks exclusions or alternative guidance.

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

All SimplyPrint: 3D Print Farm Management toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Most tools are clearly separated by resource and action, but several overlapping queue-related tools exist—get_next_queue_item vs get_next_queue_items_for_printers, list_queue vs list_pending_queue_items, and inspect_printer_queue—which could cause misselection. list_custom_fields vs list_custom_fields_for and add_to_queue vs create_print_job add further ambiguity.

Naming Consistency4/5

Names overwhelmingly follow a verb_noun snake_case pattern with consistent resource nouns like print_job, queue_item, folder, and filament. Minor inconsistencies exist, such as add_to_queue vs create_folder/create_print_job, save_queue_group vs update/create, and the slightly odd home_printer and send_back_for_revision.

Tool Count1/5

With 74 tools, this is far beyond the recommended MCP server size and makes the toolset unwieldy to navigate, even for a broad domain. This clearly falls into the extreme 50+ tool category.

Completeness3/5

Core operational workflows—queue, print jobs, files, filament, and printer control—are well represented. However, printer lifecycle management is missing (no add/update/delete printer), and maintenance management is limited to a read-only dashboard with no corresponding actions.

Resources