qidi-mcp

query_filament_sensor

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check if filament is currently detected and whether the filament sensor is enabled, helping diagnose print readiness and sensor state.

Instructions

Whether filament is currently detected, and whether the sensor is enabled.

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": "query_filament_sensor"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sensor`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.1Nov 9, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The remaining description text essentially restates the return values, which an output schema already provides, so it adds little behavioral context such as what a null sensor means or how 'enabled' differs from 'detected'.

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?

It is a single short sentence with no padding, but it is grammatically a fragment and does not front-load an action verb, which slightly weakens clarity. Nothing superfluous is present, so the issue is underspecification rather than verbosity.

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?

Because an output schema exists, the description does not need to enumerate return values, and it is adequate for a simple read tool. However, it leaves the single optional parameter and its default behavior completely undocumented, which is a real gap for an agent deciding how to call it.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has one optional parameter, 'sensor', with 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions it. It does not explain what a null or omitted sensor means (default sensor vs. all sensors) or what values are acceptable, so it fails to compensate for the schema gap.

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 description names the specific resource and the two facts it reports: current filament detection and whether the sensor is enabled. It is a noun-phrase fragment rather than a verb+resource statement, but the content is concrete enough to distinguish it from set_filament_sensor, which implies a write rather than a report.

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 guidance on when to call this versus alternatives such as set_filament_sensor or query_endstops, and no prerequisites or exclusions are stated. The agent must infer that this is the read counterpart to the setter purely from the tool name.

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

Deploy Server