sch_get_directives

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

With no annotations, the description still makes clear this is a read-only enumeration by using "Enumerate" and "Returns every...". It discloses the active-sheet scope and return structure, though it does not explicitly discuss permissions, error behavior when no schematic is active, or side effects.

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 purpose is front-loaded, followed by practical usage guidance and a compact return summary. The structure is efficient and no sentence is filler.

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 no-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description is complete enough: it identifies the active-sheet scope, use cases, and returned directive structure. An agent has what it needs to select and invoke it correctly.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain; this reaches the baseline for a no-parameter tool. The description correctly focuses on behavior and return contents instead.

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: "Enumerate parameter-set directives on the active schematic sheet." It also clarifies that it returns every ISch_ParameterSet and where it lives, which clearly distinguishes this read/enumeration tool from mutation siblings such as sch_add_directive.

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?

It gives concrete use cases: auditing explicit NetClass / DifferentialPair / custom-rule assignments before compile, or verifying that bulk placement worked. It does not name alternatives or explicit when-not conditions, but the intended usage context is clear.

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