Skip to main content
Glama
ProductOfAmerica

mcp-server-kicad

by ProductOfAmerica
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

add_sheet_pin

Add a pin to an existing hierarchical sheet block.

Instructions

Add a pin to an existing hierarchical sheet block.

The pin goes on the chosen edge at the first slot, counting down from the sheet's top
edge in steps of 2.54 mm, that has no pin within 2.54 mm and lies inside the edge (this
layout is the tool's own, not KiCad's). When the edge has no such slot the call is
refused, writing nothing, and the message gives the height that takes one more pin
(set it with modify_hierarchical_sheet). A direction that is not one of the five below,
an empty name and a side other than left or right are refused too.

Args:
    sheet_uuid: UUID of the sheet
    pin_name: Pin name (should match a hierarchical label in the child schematic)
    connection_type: input, output, bidirectional, tri_state, passive
    schematic_path: Path to parent .kicad_sch. Optional; omit to use the configured default.
    side: Which sheet edge to place pin on (left or right)

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sideNoleft
pin_nameYes
sheet_uuidYes
schematic_pathNo
connection_typeYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.21.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / side / enum
      Added value: +[
+  "left",
+  "right"
+]
  2. First observedv0.9.1

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Adds substantial context beyond the hints: each call consumes the next free slot (explaining why idempotentHint=false), failed validation is atomic ("writing nothing"), the error message carries actionable data (the required height), and the layout is explicitly the tool's own rather than KiCad's. Also enumerates the validation rules that cause refusal.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded, followed by behavior, then arguments; every sentence carries information (slot algorithm, refusal semantics, remedy). The Args block restates schema titles, which is justified at 0% coverage but keeps it from being maximally tight.

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?

For a mutation tool with an output schema available, the description covers what is needed to invoke it correctly: placement rule, atomic refusals, validation constraints and the pointer to the sibling that resolves the failure case. Nothing needed for a correct call is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the load, and it does: all five parameters are explained, and it supplies the five connection_type values that the schema does not constrain with an enum. It also states schematic_path is optional with a configured default and that side is left/right.

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?

Specific verb+resource ("Add a pin to an existing hierarchical sheet block"), scoped to hierarchical sheets so it is distinguishable from add_hierarchical_label and from the create/modify sheet siblings. An agent knows exactly what this produces without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives the placement rule (first free slot from the top edge in 2.54 mm steps) and the failure condition (no slot -> refused, nothing written), plus the remedy (modify_hierarchical_sheet) and the pin_name/hierarchical-label relationship. It stops short of naming explicit alternatives such as add_hierarchical_label, so it is clear but not fully routing.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools