pcb_delete_via

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

No annotations are present, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits. Critical information such as whether the deletion is destructive, if it affects connectivity, or if it can be undone is missing.

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 is extremely concise but underspecified. It consists of a single phrase that adds no value beyond the tool name, failing to earn its place with useful information.

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?

For a delete operation in a PCB design tool, the description lacks essential context such as destructive nature, required permissions, impact on routing, and existence of an undo option. Given no annotations or output schema, the description is severely incomplete.

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 provides a description for the only parameter ('过孔图元 ID 列表'), achieving 100% coverage. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond schema, so it meets the baseline of 3.

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 '删除过孔' clearly states the tool deletes a via, using a verb+resource structure. It distinguishes from sibling delete tools (e.g., pcb_delete_tracks) by specifying the object type (via). However, it does not mention that it deletes specific vias via primitiveIds, which the schema shows.

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?

No usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool vs alternatives, such as pcb_delete_selected or pcb_delete_tracks, nor does it mention prerequisites or side effects.

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