Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

roll_back_machine_firmware

Destructive

Restore a Klipper (Moonraker) firmware component to its previous version after an update, while skipping machines that are currently printing.

Instructions

Roll one firmware component back to the version it had before its last update.

        Only Klipper (Moonraker) machines keep a version to return to;
        ``check_machine_firmware`` shows it as ``rollback_version``.  A
        machine that is printing is refused and left alone.  Rolling back
        several machines in one call needs Kiln Business.

        Args:
            component: The component to roll back, as
                ``check_machine_firmware`` names it (e.g. ``"klipper"``).
            machine: The machine to roll back, by name.  Omitted, the
                machine Kiln is connected to.
            machines: Several machines to roll back in one call, by name.
            all_machines: Roll back every machine registered with Kiln.

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": {
      "component": "<component>"
    },
    "name": "roll_back_machine_firmware"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
machineNoThe machine to roll back, by name. Omitted, the machine Kiln is connected to.
machinesNoSeveral machines to roll back in one call, by name.
componentYesThe component to roll back, as ``check_machine_firmware`` names it (e.g. ``"klipper"``).
all_machinesNoRoll back every machine registered with Kiln. Default: false.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.5.1

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is carried structurally; the description adds tier gating (Kiln Business for multi-machine), the eligibility constraint limited to Klipper machines, and the refusal behavior while printing. It stops short of describing failure handling or what is left behind if a rollback is interrupted, which is the one remaining behavioral gap for a destructive action.

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 prose portion is front-loaded and dense with useful constraints, but the Args block duplicates the input schema field-for-field, which is pure repetition rather than added information. Formatting artifacts (indented line-continuations, double backticks) reduce readability without cost savings elsewhere.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should ideally say what a successful rollback returns or what a refusal looks like, and it does not. Everything else an agent needs before calling a destructive firmware operation — eligibility, prerequisites, print-state guard, tier gate — is present.

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%, and the Args block restates the property descriptions almost verbatim (component, machine, machines, all_machines), so it adds no meaning beyond the schema. The one non-redundant hint is that 'component' must use the naming from check_machine_firmware, which is already present in the schema text.

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 opening sentence gives a specific verb and resource ('Roll one firmware component back') plus the exact target state ('the version it had before its last update'), which cleanly separates it from siblings like update_machine_firmware and check_machine_firmware. An agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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 names the preconditions and alternatives explicitly: only Klipper (Moonraker) machines retain a rollback target, check_machine_firmware is the way to discover rollback_version, a printing machine is refused, and multi-machine rollback requires Kiln Business. These are the exact conditions that select or disqualify this tool.

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