Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

lookup_fastener

Read-only

Retrieve full specifications for screws, bolts, and threaded fasteners to verify sizing, fit, and hardware compatibility.

Instructions

Get the full spec for a screw, bolt, or threaded fastener.

Free door, tiered answer — Free: Warnings — always free · Pro: Sizing and fit for the hardware you bought · Business: + Per-machine fit, validation tests and QC plans across your fleet · Enterprise: + Child-safety & supplier vetting for magnets.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "lookup_fastener"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesScrew / bolt / insert name. Case-insensitive, whitespace-tolerant, accepts standard variants.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.5.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Added value: +"Screw / bolt / insert name.  Case-insensitive, whitespace-tolerant, accepts standard variants."
  2. Addedv1.5.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only and closed-world, and the description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior: the answer is tier-gated, with warnings always free and sizing/fit gated behind Pro and above. That tells an agent why a response may be partial. It still says nothing about unknown-name behavior or lookup limits.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The first sentence is front-loaded and earns its place. The second is a dense promotional tier ladder whose last clause (child-safety and supplier vetting for magnets) drifts away from fasteners, diluting focus without being wholly irrelevant.

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?

For a single-parameter read tool this covers the essentials, and the tier list hints at what a response contains. With no output schema and an unexplained "full spec," an agent still cannot anticipate the returned fields or 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 single 'name' parameter already documents case-insensitivity, whitespace tolerance, and accepted variants. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond that, so the 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?

"Get the full spec for a screw, bolt, or threaded fastener" names a specific verb and resource, so an agent can tell this is a lookup rather than a recommendation or design tool. It does not mention any sibling (e.g. recommend_hardware_pocket, compute_iso_fit), which keeps it short of a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance and no named alternative among the many adjacent hardware/clearance tools (recommend_hardware_pocket, compute_iso_fit, design_hole_for_product). The tier sentence describes result breadth, not task routing, so selection still has to be inferred.

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