Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

encryption_status

Read-only

Check G-code encryption status and configuration: report whether encryption is active, a local key is configured, the cryptography library is installed, and how account print files are encrypted.

Instructions

Check G-code encryption status and configuration.

        Enterprise feature. Reports whether encryption is active on
        this computer, whether the local encryption key is configured,
        and whether the cryptography library is installed.  On a
        machine where encryption at rest is not installed, it answers
        that encryption is not active here, in the same shape, and
        says what enables it.  ``account_files`` says, on every
        install, what is true of the print files kept in the person's
        Kiln account: Kiln's servers encrypt those with a key held
        there.  Local files on this computer are encrypted only when
        the local key is set and encryption is installed here.

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": "encryption_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: this is an enterprise-gated feature, and on a machine without encryption at rest it still returns an answer in the same shape rather than erroring — important for an agent interpreting a negative result. It stops short of describing the concrete field names, but the general shape is disclosed.

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?

The purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence and the rest builds context in a logical order: gating, reported facts, degraded-environment behavior, then the local-vs-account distinction. It is somewhat wordy — the aside about what enables encryption and the repeated restatement of the local-key condition could be tightened — but no sentence is purely filler.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the return-value burden and does so by naming the three facts reported and guaranteeing the same shape on non-encrypted installs. Since the tool is parameterless and read-only, little else is needed; only the precise response field names remain unspecified.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so per the baseline this scores 4. There is no argument meaning to add, and the description correctly spends its space on what the call returns instead of inventing inputs.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The first line names a specific verb and resource (check G-code encryption status and configuration), and the body enumerates exactly what is reported: whether encryption is active, whether the local key is configured, and whether the crypto library is installed. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling `account_files`, which reports on cloud-stored print files rather than local disk, so an agent can route correctly without opening a schema.

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?

It states the gating context ("Enterprise feature") and routes the agent to `account_files` when the question is about Kiln-account files rather than this computer. What is missing is an explicit when-not clause for the tool itself, e.g. that it is a diagnostic rather than something to enable encryption, but the alternative is named and the condition that selects it is clear.

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