pcb_open_document

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

With no annotations provided, the description must bear the burden of disclosure. It states the action 'switch to document' but doesn't mention side effects, whether the previous document is closed, or any authorization needs. It is adequate but not rich.

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 a single sentence, front-loaded with key information, and contains no unnecessary words. It is concise and efficient.

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 the tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema, the description conveys the basic purpose and input. However, it does not mention the return value or possible outcomes, which leaves some ambiguity. It is minimally adequate.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'uuid', but the description only says '文档 UUID' (document UUID), which does not add extra meaning beyond the schema. With high coverage, baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 '切换到指定文档（原理图或 PCB）' clearly states the tool switches to a specified document, with parenthesis indicating schematic or PCB. It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like pcb_get_board_info which read rather than switch.

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 implies the tool is used when you need to navigate to a different document, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. It meets a basic level but lacks depth.

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