Slicewise

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Get Bambu Studio companion status

bambu_get_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Reports BambuStudio data directory, slicer availability, preset counts, selected machine/filaments, allowed model directories, and platform integration levels to reveal Slicewise capabilities.

Instructions

Reports the BambuStudio data directory, whether the slicer executable is available, preset counts, the machine and filaments currently selected in Studio, the allowed model directories, and the integration level of each model platform. Use it first to see what this server can do on this machine. No side effects.

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": "bambu_get_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`dataDir`	Yes
`version`	Yes
`catalogs`	Yes
`profileId`	No
`slicerPath`	Yes
`presetCounts`	Yes
`slicerAvailable`	Yes
`currentSelection`	Yes
`outputConfigured`	Yes
`allowedModelRoots`	Yes
`inheritanceFlattening`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the description's 'No side effects' only restates the safety profile rather than adding to it. It does add useful scope context by enumerating what the report covers (directories, executable availability, per-platform integration level), but says nothing about cost, freshness, or failure behavior when Bambu Studio is absent.

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?

Front-loaded with the substantive payload list in the first sentence, followed by a short usage cue and a safety note. The enumerations are long but each item maps to real returned fields; the closing 'No side effects' is largely redundant with annotations.

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-value formatting needn't be described, and zero params remove input ambiguity. What remains missing is what an agent should do when the executable is unavailable or how stale the reported Studio selections are; otherwise it is sufficient for a no-arg status tool.

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 there is no schema semantics to compensate for; baseline is 4. The description instead characterizes what each returned datum means (e.g. preset counts, currently selected machine and filaments, integration level per platform), which informs interpretation of results.

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?

Names a specific verb (reports) and enumerates the concrete resource set it returns: data directory, executable availability, preset counts, selected machine/filaments, allowed model directories, and per-platform integration level. This is unmistakably distinct from siblings like bambu_list_presets or bambu_diagnose, which target narrower subsets.

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?

Explicitly says to use it first to discover what the server can do on this machine, which gives a clear entry-point condition. It does not name which sibling to call next when a specific capability is missing or unavailable, so it falls short of full when/when-not routing.

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

Deploy Server