Add Schematic Hierarchical Label

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond the annotations, notably the requirement that 'the label text must exactly match the corresponding sheet pin name' and the role of hierarchical labels in linking sub-sheets to parents. No contradiction with annotations.

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 two concise sentences that front-load the purpose and then provide essential context. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant or filler content.

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 mutation tool with a destructive hint, output schema, and fully documented parameters, the description covers the key conceptual point (hierarchical labels and the matching requirement). It might benefit from mentioning prerequisites like an existing hierarchy, but the existing schema and annotations fill many gaps.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not provide additional parameter details beyond the schema; the only extra nuance is the exact-match requirement for 'text', but that is already present in the schema's description for the text parameter.

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 identifies the tool's function: 'Add a hierarchical label (sheet interface port) to a sub-sheet schematic.' It explains what a hierarchical label is and how it connects to the parent via sheet pins, which differentiates it from sibling tools like add_schematic_net_label or add_sheet_pin.

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 usage context is implied by the description: it is for adding hierarchical labels to sub-sheet schematics. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., net labels) or mention any exclusions or prerequisites.

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