qidi-mcp

list_fans

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists every QIDI Max 4 fan with current speed and type, including part-cooling, auxiliary, chamber, hotend, and board fans; shows which firmware-managed fans report but cannot be set.

Instructions

Every fan on the printer with its current speed and type: the part-cooling fan, the Max4's two auxiliary fans, the chamber circulation fan, and the firmware-managed hotend/board fans (which report but cannot be set).

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": "list_fans"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.1Nov 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: which fans are settable versus firmware-managed and merely reported, which is exactly the constraint an agent needs before deciding whether to try changing a value.

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 that opens with the verb and resource, then qualifies with an enumeration. The enumeration is long but each item carries distinct information about which fans exist; no filler sentences are present.

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?

With an output schema present, the description need not explain return values, and it correctly focuses on scope and the set/unset constraint. For a zero-parameter read-only tool, the only minor omission is not explicitly naming set_fan_speed as the write counterpart.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies; there is nothing for the description to compensate for, and it rightly spends no words on parameter semantics.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Every fan on the printer with its current speed and type') and enumerates the exact fan categories returned, including the Max4 auxiliary fans and chamber fan. This lets an agent distinguish it from set_fan_speed without any further reading.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The parenthetical that hotend/board fans 'report but cannot be set' implicitly scopes read-only usage and hints at set_fan_speed as a complement, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance or alternatives are named.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server