Kiln

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

predict_print_settings

Read-only

Predict 3D print settings from historical data by matching file hashes or similar models, then falling back to material defaults.

Instructions

Predict optimal print settings from historical DNA data.

        Searches for exact file hash matches first, then falls back to
        geometrically similar models, and finally to material defaults.

        Args:
            file_hash: SHA-256 hash of the model file.
            geometric_signature: Geometric signature from fingerprinting.
            surface_area_mm2: Surface area in mm^2.
            volume_mm3: Model volume in mm^3.
            complexity_score: Model complexity (0.0-1.0).
            printer_model: Target printer model.
            material: Target material.
            geometric_signature_v2: ``fingerprint_model``'s
                ``geometric_signature_v2``.  Pass it: without it the
                prediction can be averaged over prints of a DIFFERENT
                design that shares the older signature.

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": {
      "file_hash": "<file_hash>",
      "geometric_signature": "<geometric_signature>",
      "surface_area_mm2": "<surface_area_mm2>",
      "volume_mm3": "<volume_mm3>",
      "complexity_score": "<complexity_score>",
      "printer_model": "<printer_model>",
      "material": "<material>"
    },
    "name": "predict_print_settings"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`material`	Yes	Target material.
`file_hash`	Yes	SHA-256 hash of the model file.
`volume_mm3`	Yes	Model volume in mm^3.
`printer_model`	Yes	Target printer model.
`complexity_score`	Yes	Model complexity (0.0-1.0).
`surface_area_mm2`	Yes	Surface area in mm^2.
`geometric_signature`	Yes	Geometric signature from fingerprinting.
`geometric_signature_v2`	No	``fingerprint_model``'s ``geometric_signature_v2``. Pass it: without it the prediction can be averaged over prints of a DIFFERENT design that shares the older signature. Default: "".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed8 schema fields changedv1.5.1Nov 5, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / complexity_score / description
```
Added value: +"Model complexity (0.0-1.0)."
```
addedInput schema / properties / file_hash / description
```
Added value: +"SHA-256 hash of the model file."
```
addedInput schema / properties / geometric_signature / description
```
Added value: +"Geometric signature from fingerprinting."
```

changedInput schema / properties / geometric_signature_v2 / description

Previous value: -"Default: \"\"."New value: +"``fingerprint_model``'s ``geometric_signature_v2``.  Pass it: without it the prediction can be averaged over prints of a DIFFERENT design that shares the older signature. Default: \"\"."

addedInput schema / properties / material / description
```
Added value: +"Target material."
```
addedInput schema / properties / printer_model / description
```
Added value: +"Target printer model."
```
addedInput schema / properties / surface_area_mm2 / description
```
Added value: +"Surface area in mm^2."
```
addedInput schema / properties / volume_mm3 / description
```
Added value: +"Model volume in mm^3."
```

Changed2 schema fields changedv1.5.0Oct 23, 2026
- removedInput schema / properties / geometric_signature_v2 / default
```
Removed value: -""
```
- addedInput schema / properties / geometric_signature_v2 / description
```
Added value: +"Default: \"\"."
```
Changed1 schema field changedv1.3.1Aug 19, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / geometric_signature_v2
```
Added value: +{
+  "default": "",
+  "title": "Geometric Signature V2",
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
First observedv0.1.0Jul 4, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that by disclosing the three-tier resolution strategy and warning that omitting geometric_signature_v2 can average predictions over a DIFFERENT design — a non-obvious accuracy hazard. It stops short of describing confidence levels, return shape, or latency, so it is not a 5.

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 purpose sentence and fallback-chain paragraph are well front-loaded and earn their place, and the v2 warning is actionable. However, the Args block duplicates all eight parameter descriptions already present in the schema, doubling text length without adding information.

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?

With no output schema, the description should say something about results, and it does at least indicate that output is predicted settings derived from historical data. For an eight-parameter, read-only prediction tool the definition covers inputs and resolution logic adequately; the remaining gap is what the returned settings look like and whether confidence accompanies them.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all eight parameters, and the description's Args block largely restates them verbatim. The geometric_signature_v2 warning is the one piece of semantic weight, but the identical text already appears in the schema's own description for that property, so marginal added meaning is low.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Predict optimal print settings from historical DNA data,' which tells an agent exactly what the tool produces and from what source. It does not, however, distinguish itself from siblings like infer_print_settings, get_optimal_settings, or recommend_settings, which appear to serve overlapping goals.

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 fallback chain ('exact file hash matches first, then... geometrically similar models, and finally... material defaults') implies usage context and the 'Pass it:' note is an explicit call-to-action for one parameter. But there is no explicit statement of when to choose this over infer_print_settings or get_optimal_settings, and no preconditions are spelled out.

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

Deploy Server