SimplyPrint: 3D Print Farm Management

list_print_jobs

Read-onlyIdempotent

List past print jobs with pagination, filters, and sort. Compact mode (default) drops gcodeAnalysis, filament breakdowns, and panel-only flags.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	Yes	Page number (1-based)
`limit`	No	Cap on results per page (1-100). Alias for page_size.
`search`	No	Filename / UID / custom-field substring search
`compact`	No	Keep 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_by`	No	Sort by this field. Default: started date desc (newest first).
`sort_id`	No
`sources`	No
`end_date`	No	Latest start (ISO-8601)
`sort_dir`	No	Sort direction; default desc.
`spool_id`	No	Only jobs that used this filament spool
`user_ids`	No	Only jobs started by these users (requires VIEW_ALL_PRINT_HISTORY)
`page_size`	Yes	Items per page (1-100)
`queue_job`	No
`start_date`	No	Earliest start (ISO-8601)
`printer_ids`	No	Only jobs from these printer ids
`machine_types`	No
`printer_types`	No
`printer_groups`	No	Only jobs from printers in these groups
`archived_status`	No	null (default): hide archived; archived: only archived; both: include archived
`accepted_statuses`	No	Filter by job status. Multiple values OR-matched.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description adds behavioral detail beyond the read-only/idempotent annotations by mentioning compact mode default and which fields are omitted. This is useful extra transparency, though it does not cover all response behaviors.

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 concise at two sentences, front-loading the core action. It contains no filler and directly states the tool's primary function and a notable default behavior.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (20 parameters), the description provides a high-level overview of capabilities (pagination, filters, sort) but does not enumerate filter types or return structure. The schema supplies details, so the description is minimally sufficient but could be more complete for a complex tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description does not reference any specific parameters. With 75% schema coverage, the baseline is not high, and the description fails to add meaning to the many parameters. It only generically mentions pagination, filters, and sort without elaborating on schema details.

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 clearly states the tool lists past print jobs, distinguishing it from singleton retrieval (get_print_job) and queue listing (list_queue). The verb 'list' and object 'print jobs' are specific.

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 stating the action, but it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. It lacks guidance on when not to use it, though the name and purpose are self-explanatory.

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 tools Inspect

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.

list_print_jobs

Input Schema

TDQS

Glama MCP Gateway

TDQS

Resources