Export Gerber Single

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

Annotations already mark the tool as destructive. The description adds that it reads the 'last SAVED state' of the .kicad_pcb, a non-obvious constraint, and specifies the underlying CLI command. It doesn't elaborate on file overwriting, but the destructive hint covers that aspect.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the primary action. Each sentence adds distinct value: function, sibling differentiation, and option summary. No redundant content; the long list of options is still compact and relevant.

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's complexity (20 params, output schema present), the description offers a solid high-level overview including the critical saved-state behavior and the option families. Minor gaps like default layer handling remain, but the schema covers parameter specifics.

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 schema provides complete descriptions for all 20 parameters (100% coverage). The description groups them into broad categories (e.g., 'DNP fab-layer modes') but adds no syntax, dependency, or default-value details beyond the schema, so the baseline 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?

Clearly states the tool's function: plotting layers to a SINGLE Gerber file via kicad-cli. The emphasis on 'SINGLE' and the phrase 'Singular sibling of export_gerbers' explicitly distinguishes it from the plural-export sibling.

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?

Explicitly identifies its sibling relationship with export_gerbers, implying a use case for single-file output. However, it does not explicitly contrast with the similarly named export_gerber tool or mention when not to use it, so the guidance is strong but not fully explicit.

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