Skip to main content
Glama
Praket7

mastercam-mcp

by Praket7
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

get_stock

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the current stock definition and units from an active Mastercam session to confirm material setup.

Instructions

Report stock definition and units

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYes
dataNo
liveNo
toolYes
errorNo
receiptNo
documentRevisionNo
operationFingerprintNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed11 schema fields changedv0.3.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • removedInput schema / properties / confirmed
      Removed value: -{
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / dryRun
      Removed value: -{
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / feed
      Removed value: -{
-  "type": "number"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / name
      Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / operationId
      Removed value: -{}
    • removedInput schema / properties / operationIds
      Removed value: -{
-  "items": {},
-  "type": "array"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / outputPath
      Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / speed
      Removed value: -{
-  "type": "number"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / toolId
      Removed value: -{}
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {},
+    "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"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description aligns with these annotations and adds that the report covers 'definition and units', but it does not disclose any behavior beyond that. No annotation contradiction exists.

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 a single, tightly scoped sentence with no filler or repetition. It front-loads the core purpose and earns every word.

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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only tool with an output schema present, the description is minimally sufficient. It states what the agent can expect to retrieve. The only gap is the lack of an explicit 'current' or 'active' qualifier, but the getter pattern and tool name make that reasonably inferable.

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

Parameters4/5

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

With zero parameters and 100% schema description coverage, there is no parameter documentation burden on the description. The phrase 'definition and units' hints at the content of the response, which is helpful but not required.

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 uses a specific verb, 'Report', and names the resource: 'stock definition and units'. This makes it clear it is a read-only getter for stock data, and distinguishable from sibling tools like get_tool or get_operation. It is not a full 5 because it does not explicitly clarify what 'stock' refers to in context.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_geometry_summary or get_active_part. There is no mention of when-not-to-use, and the intended invocation context is left entirely to inference.

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