add_wires

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

Annotations are all false, so the description must explain side effects, coordinate units, or file modification behavior, but it doesn't. It only states the parameter format, offering no insight into what happens when wires are added.

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 tight and front-loaded with the essential action. Every sentence provides value, with no filler or repetition of schema details.

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?

Given the simple parameter set and presence of an output schema, the description covers the essentials. However, it omits details like coordinate system, file existence prerequisites, or whether the operation is atomic, leaving some gap in context.

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%, but the description compensates by explaining the 'wires' parameter as a list of wire defs with keys and the 'schematic_path' as an optional path to a .kicad_sch file with default fallback. This adds meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 clearly states the action ('Add multiple wires at once') and specifies the resource (wires) with coordinate keys. It distinguishes from other schematic tools by focusing on batch wire addition, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., removing wires, adding labels). The description implies usage via the name, but lacks context or exclusions.

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