Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ChartQuery MCP Server

ChartQuery MCP Server

by chartquery
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Label Parse

label_parse
Read-only

Parse raw printer commands in TSC, ZPL, EPL, or other supported languages into structured elements by sending source and language for label inspection or processing.

Instructions

Label Parse. Parse printer commands into structured elements. POST source and language (tsc, zpl, epl, …). Credit cost: 1 credit per call.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "source": "<source>",
      "language": "<language>"
    },
    "name": "label_parse"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fieldsNoComma-separated list of fields to keep in the response, with dot notation for nested fields (e.g. name,location.city). Does not change the credit cost.
sourceYesRaw printer commands to parse. Also send language.
languageYesLanguage of the source commands. Example: tsc or zpl. Allowed values: tsc, zpl, epl, cpcl, dpl, sbpl, ipl. Default: "tsc".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context beyond the annotations: it states the transport style used ('POST source and language'), and it states that each call costs 1 credit, a constraint in neither the schema nor the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two of the three sentences are dense and front-load the important information, but the string 'Label Parse.' is pure waste: it restates the title and the tool name without adding information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

There is no output schema, so the description has to explain the return shape. It says only 'structured elements', without naming the element types or how parse failures are reported. That omission leaves an agent unable to predict the response shape or handle errors.

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 100%, so all three parameters are already documented; the baseline is therefore 3. The description restates that source and language must be sent together and names example languages (tsc, zpl, epl), but it adds nothing new about the optional 'fields' projection parameter.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Parse printer commands into structured elements.' An agent can distinguish this tool as the parser from siblings such as label_compile, label_convert, and label_render, even though the description does not name those alternatives explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies a usage context through 'Parse printer commands into structured elements', but gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and never routes the agent among the many label_* siblings (compile, convert, validate, render).

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