mcp-server-qidi

Console log

qidi_console

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read recent printer console lines and G-code responses to diagnose why a print failed to start or stopped unexpectedly.

Instructions

The last lines of the printer console (G-code responses and errors). Read this when a print failed to start or stopped unexpectedly.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "qidi_console"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`count`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context about what the payload contains (G-code responses and errors), which helps the agent decide whether this log is the right evidence source; it stops short of noting retention across restarts or what happens when the buffer is empty.

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?

Two short sentences, no filler, with the what (console tail) front-loaded ahead of the when (failure triage). Every clause earns its place.

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 one-optional-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, this covers the essentials: what is returned, what it contains, and why the agent would call it. The only real gap is the shape of the return value (raw text vs. line list) and count's bounds, already partly visible in the schema.

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 0% for the single optional parameter, so the description has to carry meaning for 'count'. 'The last lines' implies count selects how many trailing lines are returned, which is a partial compensation, but it never states the default (40) or the 200-line cap or the ordering.

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?

Names a specific resource — the printer console's trailing lines — and characterizes the content as G-code responses and errors. The verb is delivered in the second sentence ('Read this'), so it's unambiguous what the tool returns, though it never explicitly says 'retrieve/return'.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives a concrete triggering condition: use it when a print failed to start or stopped unexpectedly. It does not say when NOT to use it or point at a sibling like qidi_job_history or qidi_printer_status for the same diagnostic question, so the routing is clear but not exclusive.

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

Deploy Server