Skip to main content
Glama

complete_print_recovery

Destructive

Mark a print recovery session as complete, recording success or failure and final notes; on failure, optionally assess whether the job should move to another printer.

Instructions

Mark a recovery session as completed.

        On failure (success=False) with ``alternative_printers`` and
        kiln-pro installed, the answer can carry a
        ``reroute_recommendation``: whether the failed job should
        move to one of those printers, and which.  Choosing between
        printers is Kiln Business; below
        it the answer says so once in ``reroute_recommendation_gated``.
        A failure that needs hands-on inspection of the printer is
        held where it is, in ``reroute_recommendation``, at every
        tier.  Recommendation only; the agent runs any move itself
        via ``submit_job`` / ``start_print``.

        Args:
            session_id: The session_id to complete.
            success: Whether the recovery was ultimately successful.
            notes: Final notes about the recovery outcome.
            alternative_printers: Optional other printers the job
                could move to (each with ``printer_id`` plus optional
                ``is_idle``, ``supported_materials``,
                ``build_volume_mm``, ``success_rate``).  Read only
                when ``success=False``.  Single-printer setups can
                omit this.
            completion_pct_at_failure: How far the failed print got
                (0.0–1.0); the recommendation weighs it.  Defaults
                to 0.
        

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": {
      "session_id": "<session_id>",
      "success": "<success>"
    },
    "name": "complete_print_recovery"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
notesNoFinal notes about the recovery outcome. Default: "".
successYesWhether the recovery was ultimately successful.
session_idYesThe session_id to complete.
alternative_printersNoOptional other printers the job could move to (each with ``printer_id`` plus optional ``is_idle``, ``supported_materials``, ``build_volume_mm``, ``success_rate``). Read only when ``success=False``. Single-printer setups can omit this.
completion_pct_at_failureNoHow far the failed print got (0.0–1.0); the recommendation weighs it. Defaults to 0. Default: 0.0.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changedv1.5.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / alternative_printers / description
      Added value: +"Optional other printers the job could move to (each with ``printer_id`` plus optional ``is_idle``, ``supported_materials``, ``build_volume_mm``, ``success_rate``).  Read only when ``success=False``.  Single-printer setups can omit this."
    • changedInput schema / properties / completion_pct_at_failure / description
      Previous value: -"Default: 0.0."New value: +"How far the failed print got (0.0–1.0); the recommendation weighs it.  Defaults to 0. Default: 0.0."
    • changedInput schema / properties / notes / description
      Previous value: -"Default: \"\"."New value: +"Final notes about the recovery outcome. Default: \"\"."
    • addedInput schema / properties / session_id / description
      Added value: +"The session_id to complete."
    • addedInput schema / properties / success / description
      Added value: +"Whether the recovery was ultimately successful."
  2. Changed5 schema fields changedv1.5.0
    • removedInput schema / properties / alternative_printers / default
      Removed value: -null
    • removedInput schema / properties / completion_pct_at_failure / default
      Removed value: -0
    • addedInput schema / properties / completion_pct_at_failure / description
      Added value: +"Default: 0.0."
    • removedInput schema / properties / notes / default
      Removed value: -""
    • addedInput schema / properties / notes / description
      Added value: +"Default: \"\"."
  3. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is partly covered; the description importantly adds that the response may carry a reroute_recommendation, that the recommendation is advisory only and the agent must perform the move itself, and that printer-choice logic is tier-gated (Kiln Business) while hands-on-inspection failures are always held in place. That is real behavioral context unavailable elsewhere. It still does not say what 'completing' does to the session (finality, whether monitoring stops, effect on recovery stats).

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?

The one-line purpose is correctly front-loaded, but the bulk of the body is devoted to downstream reroute_recommendation plumbing and tier marketing rather than to invoking this tool, and the indented docstring/Args block duplicates the schema descriptions verbatim. RST-style backticks and docstring formatting carry over as noise.

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?

With no output schema, describing the return payload is genuinely valuable and the reroute_recommendation explanation is the strongest part of the definition. However, coverage is lopsided: it details an optional failure-path field while omitting the basic outcome record (what a successful completion returns, whether the call is irreversible, and how it relates to record_recovery_outcome).

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 the baseline is 3. The Args block largely restates the schema verbatim, including the 'read only when success=False' and 'single-printer setups can omit' notes; the only marginal addition is framing completion_pct_at_failure as an input to the recommendation weighting, which the schema already states.

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 opening line gives a specific verb and resource: 'Mark a recovery session as completed.' That is unambiguous about what the call does to the session. It does not, however, distinguish itself from close siblings like confirm_print_recovery, cancel_print_recovery, or record_recovery_outcome, so an agent must infer the boundary from the name alone.

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?

Some conditional guidance is present ('Read only when success=False', 'Single-printer setups can omit this') and the text usefully notes that any reroute must be executed by the agent via submit_job/start_print. But there is no when-to-use versus the competing recovery tools (confirm_print_recovery, cancel_print_recovery, get_recovery_session_status), which is the main ambiguity an agent faces.

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