Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

fleet_skip_objects

Destructive

Skip failed objects across multiple fleet printers in one call. Preview the exact actions and reasons first, then confirm with the returned digest to apply them through Kiln's own checked tools.

Instructions

Skip failed objects across several fleet printers at once (Business).

This tool may ask this computer to act on your printer (upload, start, pause, resume, set a speed preset). It first answers with the actions it wants and why, and runs nothing; call it again with run_actions set to the actions_digest it answered with to carry out exactly those actions through Kiln's own tools here, with every check those tools make.

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": {
      "printers": "<printers>"
    },
    "name": "fleet_skip_objects"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
printersYeslist of ``{"printer_name": str, "object_ids": [...]}`` — the ids are backend-specific (Bambu label ids, Klipper object names, OctoPrint M486 indices), same as ``skip_print_objects``.
run_actionsNoLeave empty on the first call: the tool answers with the actions it wants and an actions_digest, and runs nothing. Call again with that digest here to carry out exactly those actions. Default: "".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.5.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / printers / description
      Added value: +"list of ``{\"printer_name\": str, \"object_ids\": [...]}`` — the ids are backend-specific (Bambu label ids, Klipper object names, OctoPrint M486 indices), same as ``skip_print_objects``."
    • changedInput schema / properties / run_actions / description
      Previous value: -"Default: \"\"."New value: +"Leave empty on the first call: the tool answers with the actions it wants and an actions_digest, and runs nothing. Call again with that digest here to carry out exactly those actions. Default: \"\"."
  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 destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=false, but the description adds substantial non-obvious behavior: the tool asks the local computer to act on hardware (upload, start, pause, resume, speed preset), performs no action on the first call, and replays through Kiln's own checked tools on the second. This dry-run/confirm contract is exactly what an agent needs before calling a destructive fleet mutation. It omits what happens on partial failure across printers or whether the Business gate blocks the call outright.

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?

Scope is front-loaded in one short sentence, followed by one dense paragraph explaining the confirmation protocol. The second sentence is long and parenthetical-heavy, but every clause carries meaning and nothing is redundant.

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 2-parameter destructive fleet mutation with no output schema, the description covers the safety-critical piece — the two-call confirmation and that execution defers to Kiln's own guarded tools. It falls short on fleet-level edge cases (partial failure across printers, per-printer eligibility, what the actions_digest response contains), which an agent would want before committing.

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 the schema already documents both the per-printer object_ids format (backend-specific ids) and the run_actions digest semantics. The description reinforces the digest flow but adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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 first sentence gives a specific verb+resource+scope: skip failed objects across several fleet printers at once, with a Business tier qualifier. It implicitly distinguishes itself from the single-printer 'skip_print_objects' sibling, but never names that sibling or 'plan_object_skip' explicitly, so the differentiation requires inference.

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 gives strong operational guidance for the two-phase call pattern (first call returns actions_digest and runs nothing, second call with the digest executes). However, it never states when to use this instead of skip_print_objects, plan_object_skip, or the fleet_* siblings like fleet_pause/fleet_cancel — usage context is implied only by 'across several fleet printers'.

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