Batch Connect

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description discloses several behavioral traits: replace=true clears existing labels, local labels may draw a wire instead of a duplicate when a facing label is nearby, global labels are placed one-per-pin, and it warns about power nets missing a PWR_FLAG. This is rich behavioral detail not present in 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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then details. Every sentence provides essential behavioral or parameter information with no filler or redundancy.

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 tool is moderately complex with nested objects and multiple behaviors, and the description covers parameter format, label semantics, edge-case behavior (facing labels), and warnings. An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. The description is complete for effective use.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that pin can be a number or name, explaining the meaning of labelType with practical guidance (global for power rails/sheet-spanning nets), and describing the effect of replace=true. This goes beyond the schema's field descriptions.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Place net labels on multiple pins in one call to wire nets quickly.' This clearly states what the tool does and distinguishes it from single-label tools like add_schematic_net_label, emphasizing the batch aspect.

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?

It provides clear usage context: when to use local vs global labels ('for power rails and any net that spans sheets'), and implies batch use for wiring nets quickly. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives such as add_schematic_net_label or state when not to use this tool, stopping short of a 5.

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