eda-agent

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

design_hints_from_sheet

Capture current schematic sheet component positions as placement hints so a re-run plan keeps existing parts fixed and places only new or changed ones.

Instructions

Current sheet positions, as placement_hints for a re-run.

THIS IS HOW YOU EDIT A SCHEMATIC WITH THE ENGINE. Editing by hand means choosing coordinates, which is what sch_place_components refuses. Do this instead:

design_edit_plan to change the plan (add the part, change a value, add a net).
design_hints_from_sheet to capture where everything currently sits.
design_execute_plan with those hints. Every existing part stays exactly where it is, and only the new or changed ones are placed, by the engine rather than by you.

Positions come back as BODY CENTRES, the frame placement_hints expects, converted from the symbol origins Altium reports. Pass the returned hints through unchanged; do not round or adjust them, and drop a refdes from the dict only when you deliberately want the placer free to move that part.

Needs the <project>.canvas.json snapshot that design_execute_plan writes, which is what records the library symbol behind each refdes.

Args: project_path: Absolute path to the .PrjPcb whose sheet to read.

Returns: ok / hints ({refdes: {x, y, rotation}}) / unmatched (refdes present in the snapshot but not readable now) / notes.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`project_path`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.6.1Oct 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and discloses important behavior: positions are body centres converted from symbol origins, the snapshot dependency (canvas.json written by design_execute_plan), and what unmatched means. It doesn't explicitly state that the tool is read-only/non-destructive, but the framing ('capture where everything currently sits') strongly implies it.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and then uses a numbered workflow for structure. Every sentence is useful, but some phrasing is slightly verbose (e.g., 'Editing by hand means choosing coordinates, which is what sch_place_components refuses') and could be tightened without losing meaning.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (coordinate conversion, dependency on a snapshot file), the description covers all critical details an agent needs: the workflow position, coordinate semantics, snapshot requirement, and handling of hints. The output schema exists, so return values needn't be fully explained, but the description still summarizes them helpfully.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does so for the sole parameter by defining project_path as the absolute path to the .PrjPcb whose sheet to read, adding meaning beyond the schema's bare title. Minor gaps (e.g., whether the project must be open) remain, but the essential semantics are covered.

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?

The description states the tool's specific purpose: capturing current sheet positions as placement_hints for a re-run. It explicitly names siblings (design_edit_plan, design_execute_plan, sch_place_components) and positions itself in a 3-step workflow, so an agent can distinguish its role without opening schemas.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It gives explicit when-to-use guidance via a numbered workflow (step 2), says to do this instead of hand-editing, and provides a key usage rule: pass hints unchanged and drop refdes only when the placer should be free. This covers both invocation context and parameter handling.

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

Deploy Server