Skip to main content
Glama

infer_print_settings

Analyzes an STL file's geometry to recommend optimized slicer parameters like perimeters, infill, and supports for a given material, reducing print failures.

Instructions

Infer optimal slicer settings from structural analysis.

        Bridges the gap between **design analysis** and **print success**.
        Analyzes the mesh for structural risks, then recommends concrete
        slicer parameters (perimeters, infill, supports, brim, layer height)
        tuned to compensate for the design's weaknesses.

        **Examples of what it catches:**

        - Thin neck detected → increase perimeters to 4+
        - Cantilever overhangs → enable tree supports
        - High center of gravity → add brim for bed adhesion
        - Stress concentrations → switch to gyroid infill at 50%+
        - Sharp corners → fine layer height for detail

        Material-specific: defaults vary by PLA/PETG/ABS/Nylon/TPU/ASA/PC.

        :param file_path: Path to the STL file.
        :param material: Filament type (PLA, PETG, ABS, Nylon, TPU, ASA, PC).
        :returns: Dict with perimeters, infill, supports, brim, layer height,
                  orientation, special notes, and confidence level.
        

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
materialNoPLA
file_pathYes
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It describes the tool as analyzing and recommending, which suggests a read-only operation, but does not explicitly confirm non-destructive behavior or disclose any side effects, authorization needs, or resource requirements. It adds some context with material-specific defaults but lacks full transparency.

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 description is well-structured with a clear opening, bullet-pointed examples, and a docstring-style parameter listing. It is concise enough for the purpose, with no wasted sentences.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description adequately explains the return value as a dictionary of specific slicer settings. It covers material-specific defaults and examples of structural analysis. It is sufficiently complete for an AI agent to understand the tool's inputs and outputs.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description adds useful meaning for both parameters: it clarifies 'file_path' as an STL file path and 'material' as a list of filament types. This compensates well for the empty schema, though it does not cover format or constraints for the file path.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Infer optimal slicer settings from structural analysis.' It uses specific verbs and resources, and provides concrete examples. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'predict_print_settings' or 'recommend_settings', which may have overlapping functionality.

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 implies usage context through examples of structural issues (thin neck, overhangs, etc.), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide any exclusion criteria. Usage is implied, not guided.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/codeofaxel/kiln'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server