qidi-mcp

query_probe

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check whether the probe is triggered or open without moving hardware, enabling safe status verification before print jobs or troubleshooting.

Instructions

Read the probe's current state (triggered or open) without moving anything. On the Max4 this is QIDI's inductive 'probe_air' sensor.

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_probe"
  }
}

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

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description does not need to repeat basic safety. It adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: the operation does not move anything, reports triggered/open state, and identifies the Max4 sensor as QIDI's inductive 'probe_air' sensor. Output details are left to the output schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and constraint. The Max4 hardware note is relevant and earns its place rather than being redundant filler.

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 simple zero-parameter read tool with annotations and an output schema, the description covers purpose, state values, no-motion behavior, and a hardware-specific caveat. The only notable gap is that it does not explicitly position the tool against similar probe/endstop siblings, but that is minor for this complexity level.

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?

There are zero input parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter meaning, and it appropriately focuses on state semantics and hardware context instead.

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 states a specific verb and resource: read the probe's current state, with the possible values triggered or open. The phrase 'without moving anything' helps distinguish it from probe/calibration actions, though it does not explicitly contrast with siblings such as probe_accuracy or query_endstops, so sibling differentiation is implicit rather than explicit.

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 description implies usage for a non-invasive check of probe state, especially when no motion should occur. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative guidance relative to probe_accuracy, query_endstops, or calibration tools.

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

Deploy Server