Move Component

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

Annotations already indicate destructive behavior (destructiveHint=true). The description adds context beyond this by mentioning optional rotation updates and layer flipping, which are not covered by annotations. It does not discuss side effects like trace breakage, but the additional behavior info is useful.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the primary action ('Move a PCB component to a new position') and efficiently conveys the optional capabilities. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 moderate complexity (4 params, nested object), the schema fully documents parameters, annotations cover safety (destructive), and an output schema exists. The description succinctly covers the core purpose and options. It doesn't mention prerequisites like an open board, but that is evident from sibling tools and the overall workflow.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description mentions 'new position', 'rotation', and 'flip to a different copper layer', but the schema already provides detailed explanations for these parameters. The description does not add substantial 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 the tool moves a PCB component to a new position, with optional rotation and layer flip. This distinguishes it from siblings like rotate_component and batch_move_components, making the purpose specific and unambiguous.

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?

The description implies this is for moving a component, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives such as rotate_component for rotations or batch_move_components for multiple components. There are no exclusions or comparisons provided.

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