Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
OrcaSlicer-mcp

OrcaSlicer-mcp

by BeMuCa
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

gcode_stats

Extract print time, filament usage, and layer estimates from an OrcaSlicer G-code file to review cost and model structure.

Instructions

Time, filament and layer estimates from an OrcaSlicer G-code file.

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": {
      "gcode_path": "<gcode_path>"
    },
    "name": "gcode_stats"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
gcode_pathYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
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 behavioral burden. It says the estimates come from OrcaSlicer G-code, but does not state that the operation is read-only, what happens with invalid or non-OrcaSlicer files, whether permissions are needed, or how errors are reported.

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?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately concise, though its terseness contributes to missing usage and behavioral details.

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?

For a simple one-parameter analysis tool, the description gives the core purpose and names the output metrics. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it should do more to specify the input file requirements and the shape of the returned estimates.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for gcode_path, and the description only implies that the input is an OrcaSlicer G-code file. It does not clarify path format, requiredness, accepted extensions, or whether a filesystem path is expected.

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 names the returned estimates (time, filament, layers) and the input artifact (an OrcaSlicer G-code file), which distinguishes it from slicing tools such as slice_model. It is clear, though it omits an explicit verb like 'compute' or 'return'.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance or comparison with alternatives such as slice_model or slicer_info. The implied usage is to analyze an existing G-code file, but the agent must infer that from the one-sentence description.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools