Get Schematic View Region

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe read. The description adds context about coordinate units (schematic mm) and supported image formats, but does not disclose other behaviors like return value structure. Given annotations cover the safety profile, this is adequate.

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 sentences: the first states the action and output, the second gives usage guidance. 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?

For a read-only image-export tool with full schema parameter descriptions and an output schema, the description is complete enough. It covers the purpose, the crop region concept, and the common use case. It could optionally mention defaults for width/height, but the schema already does.

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%, with each parameter including units and defaults (e.g., 'Left X coordinate of the region in mm', 'default: 800'). The description reinforces the mm unit but adds no new parameter meaning beyond the schema.

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 states 'Export a cropped region of the schematic as an image (PNG or SVG)' with a specific verb, resource, and output. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_schematic_view or export_schematic_svg that export full views.

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 explicitly states 'Useful for zooming into a specific area to inspect wiring or layout,' which tells the agent when to use this tool. While it doesn't name alternatives, the 'cropped region' scope makes the differentiation self-evident.

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