Retrieve available printers from your ZhiMu Cloud Printing account to identify accessible devices for document output.
List printers available to the current user.
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_printers"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses user-scoping ('current user') implying authorization context, but does not describe the return format, pagination behavior, or whether the listing includes offline printers.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description consists of a single, efficient sentence with no extraneous words. It is appropriately front-loaded with the core action and subject.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given that this is a simple zero-parameter listing tool without an output schema, the description is minimally complete. It could be improved by mentioning that it returns a collection/list of printer objects, but the current description is sufficient for invocation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema has zero parameters. Per the scoring rules, zero parameters establishes a baseline score of 4. The description appropriately reflects that no filtering parameters are required.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description provides a clear verb ('List') and resource ('printers') with scope ('available to the current user'). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'query_printer_detail' (which likely retrieves specific printer information) in the text itself.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'query_printer_detail', 'direct_print_document', or the various update_printer_* tools. It does not state prerequisites or conditions for use.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.