Skip to main content
Glama

route_print_job

Read-only

Choose a suitable available printer for a print job based on material, availability, queue, history, and prior version results, then explain the choice or refuse if none can take it.

Instructions

Route a print job to the best available printer in the fleet.

        Picks the registered printer best suited to this print -- the
        material, whether it is free, its queue and how its prints have
        gone -- and answers the pick, the other candidates in order, best
        first, and ``why``: a sentence saying why the pick won.  When the
        file is a print of a kept design version -- named in
        ``version_id``, or resolved from the file the way the print's own
        record resolves it -- each printer is also judged by its own
        settled results printing THAT version on this computer, which
        ``why`` says in counts; a printer that never printed the version
        has no history with it, never a bad one, and a printer marked
        needs repair (``set_machine_repair``) is not a choice.  Every
        candidate carries the facts Kiln read about it and a ``plate``
        block -- whether the plate as it stands has room for this part
        and how a print there would start.  A machine with no room, a
        plate Kiln has no record of, or a hotend the start would refuse
        the material on (it cannot reach the material's printing
        temperature), is never recommended; when none can take the print
        the answer is a refusal with each machine's own sentence:
        ``MATERIAL_EXCEEDS_HOTEND`` when no printer can melt the material
        (with ``runs_in_fleet``, the filaments each printer runs on its
        stock hotend, the closest filaments the fleet can melt and a
        route planned for the first), else ``NO_ROOM``.

        Args:
            file_path: Path to the file to print.
            material: Required filament material (e.g. "PLA", "PETG").
            quality: Quality preference — "draft", "standard", or "fine".
            priority: Job urgency — "low", "normal", or "high"; "high"
                favours a printer that can start now, beside a part
                still on its plate included.
            version_id: The kept design version this file is a print of,
                when the caller knows it.  Left out, Kiln resolves it
                from the file itself (a file it sliced here, or a kept
                model's own bytes) or routes without one.
        

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_path": "<file_path>",
      "material": "<material>"
    },
    "name": "route_print_job"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qualityNoQuality preference — "draft", "standard", or "fine".
materialYesRequired filament material (e.g. "PLA", "PETG").
priorityNoJob urgency — "low", "normal", or "high"; "high" favours a printer that can start now, beside a part still on its plate included.
file_pathYesPath to the file to print.
version_idNoThe kept design version this file is a print of, when the caller knows it. Left out, Kiln resolves it from the file itself (a file it sliced here, or a kept model's own bytes) or routes without one.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changedv1.5.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / file_path / description
      Added value: +"Path to the file to print."
    • addedInput schema / properties / material / description
      Added value: +"Required filament material (e.g. \"PLA\", \"PETG\")."
    • addedInput schema / properties / priority / description
      Added value: +"Job urgency — \"low\", \"normal\", or \"high\"; \"high\" favours a printer that can start now, beside a part still on its plate included."
    • addedInput schema / properties / quality / description
      Added value: +"Quality preference — \"draft\", \"standard\", or \"fine\"."
    • addedInput schema / properties / version_id
      Added value: +{
      +  "anyOf": [
      +    {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    }
      +  ],
      +  "description": "The kept design version this file is a print of, when the caller knows it.  Left out, Kiln resolves it from the file itself (a file it sliced here, or a kept model's own bytes) or routes without one.",
      +  "title": "Version Id"
      +}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.5.0
    • removedInput schema / properties / priority / default
      Removed value: -null
    • removedInput schema / properties / quality / default
      Removed value: -null
  3. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.3.1
    • removedInput schema / properties / material / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
      -  {
      -    "type": "string"
      -  },
      -  {
      -    "type": "null"
      -  }
      -]
    • removedInput schema / properties / material / default
      Removed value: -null
    • addedInput schema / properties / material / type
      Added value: +"string"
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "file_path"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "file_path",
      +  "material"
      +]
  4. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the read-only, non-destructive, closed-world profile, and the description goes well beyond that: it explains the ranking signals, that repair-flagged printers are never chosen, that unknown-version printers are neutral rather than penalised, and that no-room or hotend-temperature failures produce MATERIAL_EXCEEDS_HOTEND or NO_ROOM refusals with per-machine sentences.

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 lead sentence is front-loaded and states the core action before detail, which is good. The remaining body is dense and parenthetical-heavy, and the Args section duplicates schema text that is already at 100% coverage, so it is longer than necessary even if not padded.

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?

For a tool with no output schema, the description still describes the return payload: the pick, ordered alternative candidates, a 'why' sentence, a 'plate' block per candidate, and the shape of refusal responses. An agent has enough to call it and interpret results without further sources.

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%, so the schema already documents all five parameters, and the Args block largely restates those descriptions. The one genuinely additive point is how version_id drives per-printer history on this computer, but it is folded into the prose rather than sharpening each parameter's meaning.

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 opening line gives a specific verb and resource ('Route a print job') plus scope ('best available printer in the fleet'), and the body clarifies it selects rather than executes a print. It does not contrast itself with nearby siblings such as suggest_printer_for_job or optimize_fleet_assignment, which an agent might plausibly confuse it with.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Usage context is clear: call it when a print needs a printer picked, with semantics for priority ('high' favours a printer that can start now) and version_id (supply it or let Kiln resolve from the file). It never states when not to use it or names the preferred alternative for related tasks like fleet-wide assignment.

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