Move Schematic Net Label

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the mutation behavior is known. The description adds that currentPosition helps disambiguate, which is useful context beyond the annotations. It does not describe side effects or failure modes, but the annotation coverage lowers the burden.

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, both relevant and front-loaded. The first states the core action, the second adds a practical disambiguation tip. No waste 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 (5 params, output schema present, annotations provided), the description is sufficient. It explains the action and key edge case (duplicate names), while the schema and annotations cover the remaining details. Could mention coordinate system or error behavior, but these are not essential for basic usage.

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 schema fully documents all parameters. The description's mention of 'local, global, or hierarchical' aligns with the labelType enum, and the currentPosition disambiguation tip mirrors the schema description, adding no new semantic value. Baseline 3 applies because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Move a net label (local, global, or hierarchical) to a new position in the schematic' – a specific verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes from sibling move tools like move_schematic_component by targeting net labels, and mentions label types.

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?

Provides clear context for its intended use (moving net labels) and also gives a specific guideline for using currentPosition to disambiguate duplicate names. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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