Export Pos

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true; description adds the behavioral trait that it reads the last saved state, which is valuable. It also mentions exposure of the full CLI option set, giving a sense of scope. 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?

Two dense sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then sibling relationship, then the critical save-state caveat. No wasted words.

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 complexity (11 params, output schema exists), the description covers the key caveat and competitor tool. It doesn't describe the output file, but that's handled by schema. Could be more explicit about when to choose this over export_position_file, but 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 covers all 11 parameters with descriptions, so baseline 3. The description lists parameter names but does not add new meaning; it just mirrors the schema. The 'full CLI option set' phrase is generic.

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?

Description clearly states it generates a component placement file via kicad-cli, with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling export_position_file by calling itself a 'Rich CLI 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 positions itself as a richer alternative to export_position_file, giving context on when to use it. The caveat about reading the 'last SAVED state' adds a prerequisite. Does not fully enumerate exclusions but sufficient.

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