Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

update_machine_firmware

Destructive

Starts firmware updates on your 3D printer, restarting its services as each available component upgrades. Busy machines are left untouched, and multiple machines update one at a time.

Instructions

Start a firmware update on a machine. Its services restart while it runs.

        Each component goes to the version its update offers; there is no
        choosing a version.  A machine that is printing is refused and
        left alone.  Updating several machines in one call needs Kiln
        Business: they are updated one at a time, and each is reported on
        its own line.

        Args:
            component: One firmware component to update, as
                ``check_machine_firmware`` names it (e.g. ``"klipper"``).
                Omitted, every component with an update available is
                updated.
            machine: The machine to update, by name.  Omitted, the
                machine Kiln is connected to.
            machines: Several machines to update in one call, by name.
            all_machines: Update every machine registered with Kiln.

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": "update_machine_firmware"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
machineNoThe machine to update, by name. Omitted, the machine Kiln is connected to.
machinesNoSeveral machines to update in one call, by name.
componentNoOne firmware component to update, as ``check_machine_firmware`` names it (e.g. ``"klipper"``). Omitted, every component with an update available is updated.
all_machinesNoUpdate every machine registered with Kiln. Default: false.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.5.1

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description adds substantial context: services restart during the update, no version can be chosen, printing machines are left alone, and fleet updates are one-at-a-time with per-line reporting. This is meaningful behavioral detail beyond the annotations, though failure/reversibility behavior is unstated despite a sibling roll_back tool existing.

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 description is front-loaded with purpose and key behavioral notes before the Args list, and the prose is tight. The Args section partially duplicates the 100%-covered schema, which is mild redundancy but the overall structure is readable.

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?

For a destructive mutation with annotations and no output schema, the description covers the disruptive side effects, tier gating, and per-machine reporting well. Minor gaps remain around failure handling and reversibility, but the essential information an agent needs to invoke it safely 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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters. The Args block in the description is largely a restatement of the schema descriptions, adding little meaning beyond what is structured. Baseline 3 applies.

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 sentence 'Start a firmware update on a machine' gives a specific verb and resource. It is clearly distinguishable from check_machine_firmware and roll_back_machine_firmware in concept, though it does not name those siblings explicitly.

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?

It states key preconditions: a printing machine is refused, and multi-machine updates require Kiln Business. It stops short of an explicit 'run check_machine_firmware first to see available updates' guidance, but the operational context is clear.

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