Skip to main content
Glama

add_net_label

Idempotent

Add a net label or ground flag to a wire junction on an LTspice .asc schematic at specified coordinates or a component pin. Supports both adding and removing net labels.

Instructions

Add a net label or ground flag to an .asc schematic at a wire junction.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes
netYesNet name ('0' for ground, or a name like 'VDD', 'outp')
xNoX coordinate (required unless pin is specified)
yNoY coordinate (required unless pin is specified)
pinNoComponent pin reference (e.g., 'M3.S') — places label at the pin's coordinates
actionNoadd
Behavior3/5

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

Description adds context that the label is placed 'at a wire junction' beyond annotations (idempotentHint, non-destructive). However, it lacks details on side effects, error conditions, or behavior of removing a label. Annotations already indicate idempotency and non-destructiveness.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence efficiently states purpose and resource. Could include brief usage hint but remains front-loaded and to the point.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Describes core action adequately but misses guidance on coordinate vs. pin usage, action parameter behavior, and no output schema. Sufficient for a simple tool but gaps remain.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 67%, but description does not elaborate on parameters beyond schema. For example, 'path' parameter lacks schema description and is not mentioned in tool description. The description ties 'net' parameter to 'ground flag' but adds no new semantic meaning.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states verb 'Add', resource 'net label or ground flag', and context 'to an .asc schematic at a wire junction'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'connect' or 'trace_net' by specifying the operation on net labels.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'connect' or 'trace_net'. Does not mention when to use 'add' vs. 'remove' action, nor any prerequisites or constraints.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Cognitohazard/ltspice-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server