Related Servers

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, and overlapping pairs like list_jobs vs get_jobs_across_folders or get_job vs diagnose_job are explicitly differentiated in their descriptions. The guidance to prefer get_orchestrator_summary over list_folders reduces ambiguity. However, the sheer number of tools and some close functional similarities (e.g., count_queue_items vs get_queue_items) create minor potential for misselection.

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with lowercase and underscores (list_folders, get_queue_items, start_job, diagnose_job). Even multi-word names like get_jobs_across_folders and bulk_add_queue_items maintain the pattern. There are no stylistic deviations or mixed conventions.

With 24 tools, this sits at the high end of the 'borderline' range (16-25). The coverage spans multiple resource types (queues, jobs, schedules, robots, assets), so the count is justified for a broad Orchestrator domain, but it feels heavy compared to more focused servers. A few tools could be consolidated (e.g., diagnose_job could wrap get_job and get_job_logs internally without exposing them).

The set covers key operations for queues (add, get, delete, retry, count) and jobs (list, get, start, stop, diagnose, logs), which are the core workflows. However, there are notable gaps: no create/update/delete for schedules, assets, robots, or machines, and no folder management beyond listing. This means users can monitor and operate existing resources but cannot manage the full lifecycle of those resources.