mastercam-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

list_machine_groups

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists machine groups in the active Mastercam document. Provides group names and structure to manage toolpath organization.

Instructions

List machine groups in the document

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ok`	Yes
`data`	No
`live`	No
`tool`	Yes
`error`	No
`receipt`	No
`documentRevision`	No
`operationFingerprint`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed11 schema fields changedv0.3.0Sep 24, 2026

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"
+}

First observedv0.1.0Sep 8, 2026

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 adds the 'in the document' scoping, which is useful context. It does not disclose additional behavioral details such as whether the tool returns only the active group or all groups, but the annotations lower the burden here.

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 one short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to the meaning: 'List', 'machine groups', and 'in the document'. It is concise without sacrificing clarity.

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 simple, zero-parameter, read-only tool with an output schema and strong annotations, the description is largely complete. The only meaningful contextual gap is the lack of differentiation from get_machine_groups, which prevents full completeness in the broader sibling context.

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?

This tool has zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter semantics burden on the description. With no parameters to explain, the description cannot add parameter-level value; the baseline for zero-parameter tools is appropriate.

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 and resource: 'List machine groups in the document.' It clearly states the operation and scope. However, it does not distinguish itself from the closely named sibling get_machine_groups, so an agent cannot tell which tool to prefer without further schema inspection.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus get_machine_groups or other sibling tools. The description implies 'list all machine groups in the document' but does not state exclusions or alternatives. This is a notable gap because the sibling set contains a very similar-looking tool.

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

Deploy Server