pcb_get_selected_objects

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It makes clear this is a read operation and describes the return shape, but it does not state selection prerequisites, behavior when nothing is selected, or any other operational caveats.

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 front-loaded with its purpose, then cleanly documents the argument and return shape. It is appropriately sized and contains no wasted sentences.

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 simple read-only getter with one parameter and an existing output schema, the description provides enough context to invoke it correctly. Minor gaps remain around selection state and alternatives, but the core information is complete.

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 0%, so the description must explain the single parameter. It does so well by specifying comma-separated property names and listing all available properties, though it does not explain the meaning of individual properties such as TopXSize or Descriptor.

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 states a specific verb and resource: get properties of currently selected objects on the active PCB. It is clear and scoped to selection, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling query tools such as obj_query or pcb_get_components.

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 usage by referring to currently selected objects on the active PCB, but it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives. An agent must infer that selection must happen first and that other query tools may be more appropriate for non-selected objects.

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