Add Net Class

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotations. It doesn't address potential side effects such as overwriting existing net classes or how the tool interacts with current routing. Given annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, the lack of additional disclosure is a gap.

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 concise sentence that directly communicates the core functionality without unnecessary detail. It is front-loaded and free of filler.

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?

The description is minimal, relying heavily on schema and annotations. It doesn't explain important nuances like name conflicts, interaction with 'create_netclass', or whether any parameters are interdependent. Given the tool's complexity (9 params) and destructive hint, a bit more context would help.

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 already includes descriptions for all 9 parameters (100% coverage). The description's mention of 'clearance, track-width, via, and differential-pair rules' maps to schema fields but doesn't add new meaning or clarify relationships between parameters.

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 clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb ('Create') and object ('named net class'), listing key parameters such as clearance, track-width, via, and differential-pair rules. However, it does not distinguish this tool from the sibling 'create_netclass', which likely serves a similar purpose.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'create_netclass' or 'assign_net_to_class'. The description simply states the action without contextualizing its use cases.

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