Find Orphaned Wires

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds that it does not require the KiCad UI to be running, which is a useful headless-operation trait, and explains the connection rules (pins, net labels, wires) that define orphaned status.

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 with no fluff: the first defines the target, the second adds the ERC consequence, and the third notes the headless requirement. Each sentence earns its place, and the key action is front-loaded.

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 simple read-only tool with one well-documented parameter and an output schema, the description covers purpose, use case, and a critical runtime constraint. There is no missing information required for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 single parameter schematicPath is fully documented in the schema with 100% coverage, so the description need not add more. It correctly avoids duplicating the parameter's schema description.

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 uses a specific verb 'find' with a clear resource 'wire segments with at least one dangling endpoint', fully defining orphaned wires. This distinguishes it from siblings like list_schematic_wires or get_wire_connections by focusing on a specific defect rather than generic enumeration or connectivity.

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 context by explaining that orphaned wires cause ERC errors, implying when to use this tool. It does not explicitly mention alternative tools or when-not-to-use, but the intended use for detecting dangling wire ends is obvious.

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