Retrieve a specific Mastercam operation by its exact ID, ensuring precise selection without fallback to other operations.
Retrieve one operation by exact id; no fallback targeting
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| operationId | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ok | Yes | ||
| data | No | ||
| live | No | ||
| tool | Yes | ||
| error | No | ||
| receipt | No | ||
| documentRevision | No | ||
| operationFingerprint | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Input schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"Input schema / properties / confirmedRemoved value: -{
- "type": "boolean"
-}Input schema / properties / dryRunRemoved value: -{
- "type": "boolean"
-}Input schema / properties / feedRemoved value: -{
- "type": "number"
-}Input schema / properties / nameRemoved value: -{
- "type": "string"
-}Input schema / properties / operationId / maximumAdded value: +2147483647Input schema / properties / operationId / minimumAdded value: +1Input schema / properties / operationId / typeAdded value: +"integer"Input schema / properties / operationIdsRemoved value: -{
- "items": {},
- "type": "array"
-}Input schema / properties / outputPathRemoved value: -{
- "type": "string"
-}Input schema / properties / speedRemoved value: -{
- "type": "number"
-}Input schema / properties / toolIdRemoved value: -{}Input schema / requiredAdded value: +[
+ "operationId"
+]Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "data": {
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "documentRevision": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "feedRate": {},
+ "id": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "mappingEvidence": {
+ "additionalProperties": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "propertyNames": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "operationFingerprint": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "spindleSpeed": {},
+ "tool": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "toolpathDirty": {
+ "type": [
+ "boolean",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "type": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "id",
+ "name",
+ "type",
+ "feedRate",
+ "spindleSpeed",
+ "documentRevision",
+ "operationFingerprint"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "documentRevision": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "error": {
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "code": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "message": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "remediation": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "retryable": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "code",
+ "message"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "live": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "ok": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "operationFingerprint": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "receipt": {},
+ "tool": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "ok",
+ "tool"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a useful behavioral constraint ('no fallback targeting'), but it does not disclose what happens for a missing or invalid id, which would add further transparency.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
One concise, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word adds meaning, and the key scoping constraint ('exact id; no fallback targeting') is placed immediately after the verb.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a single-parameter read-only getter with an output schema and safety annotations, the description is nearly complete. It lacks only explicit guidance on when to use sibling tools or what happens when the operation does not exist.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, but the single parameter is self-explanatory from its name and type. The description reinforces that operationId must be an exact id rather than a search term, yet it does not explain where the id comes from or how invalid ids are handled.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Retrieve one operation by exact id'. 'One' and 'exact id' distinguish it from list/find/explain siblings, and 'no fallback targeting' clarifies it is not a fuzzy lookup.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies the right usage: call this when you already have an exact operationId and need that single operation. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives such as find_operations or explain_operation, or state when those should be preferred.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.