list_hierarchy

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, idempotent behavior. The description adds the concept of 'full hierarchy' and 'root', but doesn't discuss potential behaviors like handling missing path or error conditions.

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 extremely concise: one sentence and a parameter line with no extraneous text. Every word earns its place.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be described. The description is adequate for a simple listing tool but lacks usage guidance and parameter edge cases.

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 description adds that 'schematic_path' expects a path to a root .kicad_sch file, which is not fully captured in the schema (0% coverage). However, it doesn't clarify that the parameter is optional or explain default behavior.

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 tool lists the full sheet hierarchy from a root schematic. It uses specific verb 'List' and resource 'full sheet hierarchy', distinguishing it from siblings like 'list_schematic_sheets' which likely lists flat sheets.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_schematic_sheets' or 'trace_hierarchical_net'. Usage context is implied but not explicitly stated.

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