qidi-mcp

shutdown_printer

Destructive

Shut down the printer's host computer after a two-step confirmation; refused during an active print. Requires a physical power cycle to restart.

Instructions

Shut down the printer's host computer. It will NOT come back until someone power-cycles the machine physically. Two-step confirmation; refused during a print.

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": "shutdown_printer"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`confirm`	No
`confirm_token`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.1Nov 9, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description goes well past the destructiveHint annotation by stating the consequence in human terms: the machine will NOT return until someone physically power-cycles it. It also discloses the two-step confirmation requirement and the active-print refusal, which are behavioral traits the annotations do not encode.

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?

Three short sentences, each carrying distinct information: the action, the irreversibility consequence, the confirmation and precondition. The most dangerous fact is capitalized and placed early, which is exactly right for a destructive tool.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-shape explanation is not required, and the danger profile is covered thoroughly. The one real omission is the confirm_token acquisition flow, which an agent must know to invoke a two-step confirmation tool successfully.

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 0%, so both parameters rest on the description. 'Two-step confirmation' hints at the confirm/confirm_token pairing, but it never explains how a token is obtained, whether it expires, or what happens if confirm_token is null while confirm is true.

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?

Specific verb plus resource ('Shut down the printer's host computer') that an agent can act on immediately. It stops short of a 5 because a sibling named reboot_printer plausibly performs an adjacent operation and the description never draws the line between the two.

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?

'Refused during a print' gives one concrete precondition for when this call will fail, which is genuine guidance. However, there is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over reboot_printer, nor any note about lease ownership that the surrounding lease tools suggest may matter.

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

Deploy Server