add_trace

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

Annotations indicate mutability (readOnlyHint=false) but no destructiveness. The description's 'Add' verb aligns with mutation. However, no additional behavioral traits are disclosed beyond what annotations already provide.

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 short and covers all parameters, but the structure is a straightforward list. It could be more efficient by integrating parameter explanations into a single sentence rather than a linear list.

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?

The description omits key context like output behavior, interaction with the PCB file, units for coordinates (assumed mm?), and constraints on layer naming. With 8 parameters and no schema descriptions, the agent is left guessing many details.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description's parameter list is the only source. It provides one-word meanings (e.g., 'Start X', 'Trace width in mm'), which add minimal value over names and types. This is slightly above baseline but insufficient for complex parameters.

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 explicitly states it adds a trace segment between two points, which is a specific action on a distinct resource. Among siblings like 'add_via' and 'add_pcb_line', it clearly stands out as the trace addition tool.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites or contextual hints. The description lacks any explication of when to choose this over, say, 'add_via' or 'add_pcb_line'.

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