Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

set_telemetry_preference

Destructive

Set a telemetry category as opted out or opted in and mark its disclosure as acknowledged to stop repeated write banners. Use it to manage Kiln telemetry privacy preferences.

Instructions

Set the opt-out / acknowledged state for a telemetry category.

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": {
      "category": "<category>"
    },
    "name": "set_telemetry_preference"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
categoryYesOne of ``nozzle_replacement``, ``extrusion_signal``.
opted_outNoWhen True, opt out; when False, opt in (clears any prior opt-out). Default: false.
acknowledgeNoWhen True, mark the disclosure as acknowledged so the banner stops appearing on writes. Default: false.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.5.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / acknowledge / description
      Previous value: -"Default: false."New value: +"When True, mark the disclosure as acknowledged so the banner stops appearing on writes. Default: false."
    • addedInput schema / properties / category / description
      Added value: +"One of ``nozzle_replacement``, ``extrusion_signal``."
    • changedInput schema / properties / opted_out / description
      Previous value: -"Default: false."New value: +"When True, opt out; when False, opt in (clears any prior opt-out). Default: false."
  2. Addedv1.5.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, so the agent knows this mutates state. The description adds that the target is a per-category opt-out/acknowledgement flag, but it never explains what is actually destroyed or overwritten, whether opting out clears prior acknowledgement, or whether other categories are affected. With annotations carrying the safety profile a 3 is defensible, though the detail is thin.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or digression. It is efficient, though it spends its words repeating the title rather than adding constraint or scope.

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 simple three-parameter preference setter with full schema coverage and mutation annotations, the description is adequate to call the tool correctly. It falls short on the relationship to the get/consent tools and on the practical consequence of the destructive flag, which an agent managing telemetry consent would want.

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 category values, the opt-in clearing semantics, and the banner-stopping effect of acknowledge are all fully documented in the schema. The description only restates that a category and its opt-out/acknowledged state are involved, adding no format or behavioral meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource: sets the opt-out / acknowledged state for a telemetry category. That distinguishes it from the read counterpart get_telemetry_preferences by implication (set vs get), but the description never names that sibling or any other, so an agent must infer the pairing from the tool list.

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 when-to-use guidance at all: no mention of when to call this versus get_telemetry_preferences, no note that the category must already exist, and no conditions or prerequisites. What little context exists is implied only by the name.

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