Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

printer_files

Read-only

List all G-code files on a 3D printer with names, paths, sizes, and upload dates. Use it to discover which files are ready to print, then start one.

Instructions

List all G-code files available on the printer.

Handles FTPS directory listing (Bambu), REST file API
(OctoPrint/Moonraker) automatically.

Returns a JSON array of file objects, each containing:
- ``name``: file name
- ``path``: full path on the printer
- ``size_bytes``: file size (may be null)
- ``date``: upload timestamp as Unix epoch (may be null)

When G-code metadata is available, files may also include:
- ``material``, ``estimated_time_seconds``, ``tool_temp``,
  ``bed_temp``, ``slicer``, ``layer_height``, ``filament_used_mm``

Use this to discover which files are ready to print.  Pass a file's
``name`` or ``path`` to ``start_print`` to begin printing it.
For detailed metadata on a specific file, use ``analyze_print_file()``.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "printer_files"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine context beyond that: it transparently handles two distinct backends (FTPS for Bambu, REST for OctoPrint/Moonraker) without the caller choosing, and it flags that some returned fields may be null. It does not mention listing limits, pagination, or failure behavior when the printer is unreachable, which keeps it below 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.

Conciseness4/5

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

Purpose, protocol handling, and routing guidance are front-loaded before the field list, which is the correct order. The bulleted return-field enumeration is long relative to the prose, but since no output schema exists it earns its place; the only slight waste is the optional metadata field list, which could be summarized in one clause.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

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 full burden of describing the return value, and it does so field by field, including nullability. Protocol variation and the downstream start_print handoff are both covered, leaving nothing an agent needs in order to call this correctly.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter meaning to add; the baseline for a no-arg tool is 4. The description instead spends its space on output semantics, which is the right allocation here.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

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 ("List all G-code files available on the printer") and immediately scopes what counts as a file. It distinguishes itself from the metadata sibling by directing detailed inspection to analyze_print_file(), so an agent can separate the two without reading schemas.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It gives an explicit use case ("discover which files are ready to print"), an explicit next step ("Pass a file's name or path to start_print"), and an explicit alternative for a different need ("For detailed metadata on a specific file, use analyze_print_file()"). Both the when and the when-otherwise are covered.

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