Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

get_adaptive_plan_summary

Read-only

Summarizes an adaptive slicing plan into key metrics and a region breakdown, so you can review a generated plan before moving on to slicing or printing.

Instructions

Generate a human-readable summary of an adaptive slicing plan.

Args:
    plan_data: Plan dict from ``generate_adaptive_slicing_plan``
        or ``quick_adaptive_plan``.

Returns a structured summary with key metrics and region breakdown.

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": {
      "plan_data": "<plan_data>"
    },
    "name": "get_adaptive_plan_summary"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
plan_dataYesPlan dict from ``generate_adaptive_slicing_plan`` or ``quick_adaptive_plan``.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.5.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / plan_data / description
      Added value: +"Plan dict from ``generate_adaptive_slicing_plan`` or ``quick_adaptive_plan``."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is established without the description. The description contributes the output shape ("key metrics and region breakdown"), but leaves open what happens with a malformed or partial plan dict and whether any computation is expensive.

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 sentence is front-loaded and the whole thing is three short lines. The Args block largely restates the schema field description, which is minor waste but not disruptive.

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, the description carries the burden of explaining the return value, and it only says "structured summary with key metrics and region breakdown" without naming the metrics or the region structure. For a nested-object input with free-form dict typing, that leaves an agent guessing at both input expectations and output shape.

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 parameter description is essentially copied verbatim into the tool description, so no additional meaning is added. For a nested free-form object (additionalProperties: true) it would be useful to say which keys are required or tolerated, and that is not covered here.

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?

"Generate a human-readable summary of an adaptive slicing plan" gives a specific verb and resource, and the Args note ties it to the two producer tools (generate_adaptive_slicing_plan, quick_adaptive_plan), which separates it from unrelated siblings. It stops short of naming a competing summary/estimate sibling such as estimate_adaptive_time_savings, so the differentiation is partial rather than explicit.

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?

Usage is only implied: by saying the input comes from generate_adaptive_slicing_plan or quick_adaptive_plan, the reader can infer this is a post-plan formatting step. There is no statement of when to call it versus alternatives, whether it is required before printing, or when it should be skipped.

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