Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
bambu-printer-mcp

bambu-printer-mcp

by DMontgomery40
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

x2d_native_control

DestructiveIdempotent

Reads calibration results or updates X2D AMS metadata/calibration selection via plug-in, rejecting raw motion, heating, task, and safety changes.

Instructions

Read calibration results or update X2D AMS metadata/calibration selection through the installed plug-in. Raw motion, heating, task control, and safety-setting changes are rejected.

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": {
      "message_json": "<message_json>"
    },
    "name": "x2d_native_control"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qosNoMQTT QoS used by Bambu Studio (0 or 1; default 0).
flagNoBambu networking plug-in command flag (0 or 1; default 0).
hostNoHostname or IP of the printer (default: value from env)
bambu_tokenNoAccess token (default: value from env)
bambu_serialNoSerial number (default: value from env)
message_jsonYesJSON print envelope for ams_filament_setting, extrusion_cali_sel, extrusion_cali_get, extrusion_cali_get_result, or flowrate_get_result. A sequence_id is required; extra fields are rejected.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.1.14

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and idempotentHint=true, so the risk profile is known. The description adds one genuinely non-redundant behavior: a command allow-list enforced by the plug-in that rejects motion/heating/task/safety payloads. It does not explain what state a permitted 'update' overwrites, whether it can be undone, or what authorization the token requires, which is a real gap for a destructive, open-world tool.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the permitted operations followed by the rejection rule. Nearly every clause carries information; 'through the installed plug-in' is the only phrase whose value is not immediately obvious, but it does explain the transport dependency.

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 six-parameter, open-world passthrough that takes an opaque JSON envelope with no output schema, the description does not say what a read call returns or how calibration results are shaped, nor what happens on a rejected payload. The schema and annotations cover parameter names and the safety profile, so the definition is callable, but an agent must discover return and failure behavior by experiment.

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 100%, so host, token, serial, qos, and flag are fully documented without help. The description's contribution is limited to tying the update/read actions to AMS metadata and calibration selection, which is a mild semantic gain; it adds no syntax, sequencing, or error-handling detail for message_json beyond what the schema already states.

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 specific verbs and resources: read calibration results, and update X2D AMS metadata/calibration selection, routed through the installed plug-in. That is enough to separate it from siblings like get_printer_status or set_temperature, though the 'X2D' scope is never defined for an agent unfamiliar with the model.

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?

It gives a useful negative boundary: raw motion, heating, task control, and safety-setting changes are rejected, which implicitly steers those cases to siblings such as set_temperature or pause_print. However, it never names an alternative explicitly and gives no positive precondition (printer reachable, plug-in installed and running) for choosing this tool over bambu_network_call or the counterpart_* tools.

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