Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

design_version_health

Read-only

Generate a health report for a design across all versions, including per-printer print results on fleet plans.

Instructions

Full health report for a design across all its versions. On a fleet plan it also shows how each version printed on each of your printers.

Needs Kiln Pro.

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": {
      "version_ids": "<version_ids>"
    },
    "name": "design_version_health"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
design_nameNoHuman-readable design name for the report. Default: "".
version_idsYesOrdered list of version IDs (oldest first).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.5.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / design_name / description
      Previous value: -"Default: \"\"."New value: +"Human-readable design name for the report. Default: \"\"."
    • addedInput schema / properties / version_ids / description
      Added value: +"Ordered list of version IDs (oldest first)."
  2. Addedv1.5.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=true, destructive=false, and openWorld=false, so safety is covered. The description adds context beyond that: the entitlement gate (Kiln Pro) and the fact that on fleet plans the report expands to per-printer print outcomes, which tells the agent the response breadth varies by plan.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Two short, front-loaded sentences: scope first, conditional fleet behavior second, prerequisite in a separate short line. No filler, though the fleet sentence ('how each version printed on each of your printers') is slightly loose phrasing.

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 read-only, two-parameter report with no output schema, the description says enough: what the report covers, how fleet plans change it, and the plan requirement. Minor gaps remain around reporting scale (how many versions/printers is practical) and what happens with invalid or cross-design version IDs.

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 coverage is 100% and both parameters are documented there, including the 'oldest first' ordering of version_ids, so the description need not repeat it. It says nothing about design_name (optional display label) or about whether the version_ids must belong to the same design, adding no meaning beyond the schema.

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 names a specific verb and resource: a 'full health report' covering 'all its versions' of a design, with an extra fleet-plan dimension. The purpose is unambiguous on its own, but it never names or contrasts with nearby siblings such as check_design_regression, best_design_version, or compare_design_versions, so an agent must infer the boundary.

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?

'Needs Kiln Pro' gives a hard prerequisite, and the fleet-plan sentence hints at when the extra output appears. However, there is no explicit when-to-use versus when-to-use-alternatives guidance (e.g., versus a simple get_design_version or a diff), so selection between siblings remains implied.

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