Skip to main content
Glama
ProductOfAmerica

mcp-server-kicad

by ProductOfAmerica
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

list_unconnected_pins

Idempotent

List unconnected pins by running ERC and filtering results.

Instructions

List unconnected pins by running ERC and filtering results.

Requires kicad-cli. Lists the violations KiCad types pin_not_connected. A
sub-sheet is checked from its project's root, as run_erc does, and gets
the pins of that sheet alone, under every top-level sheet the project lists.
A sheet below a top-level sheet other than the root is refused when that
kicad-cli did not check it from the root. A run that makes no report
raises and leaves output_dir as it was.

The x and y of each entry are millimetres (mm) in sheet coordinates, the
numbers get_pin_positions prints.

Args:
    schematic_path: Path to .kicad_sch file. Optional; omit to use the configured default.
    output_dir: Directory for ERC report file. Optional; omit to use the configured default.
    project_path: Path to .kicad_pro file; the project whose hierarchy to look in.
        Refused when no sheet of it uses the file.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
output_dirNo
project_pathNo
schematic_pathNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
noteNo
pinsYes
unconnected_countYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.10.1

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

It discloses substantial behavior beyond the annotations: it runs ERC, filters pin_not_connected violations, checks sub-sheets from the project root, refuses certain non-root hierarchy cases, and raises without changing output_dir if no report is produced. These details give the agent clear expectations for a tool whose annotations already mark it as non-destructive but not read-only.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and then moves into necessary hierarchy and parameter details. It is dense but mostly earns its length; the hierarchy caveats are technical and useful, though some phrasing could be tighter.

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?

Given the tool's complexity, the description covers requirements, hierarchy edge cases, failure behavior, coordinate units, and all three optional parameters. With an output schema present, it does not need to explain return fields, and the remaining context is complete enough for correct invocation.

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 parameter semantics, and it does: it names the .kicad_sch path, the ERC report output directory, and the .kicad_pro project path with its hierarchy purpose and refusal condition. It also states defaults for the optional parameters, adding meaning well beyond the bare schema.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: list unconnected pins by running ERC and filtering for KiCad's pin_not_connected violations. It also distinguishes this from plain ERC by explaining the filtering and hierarchy behavior, so an agent can identify the tool 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 Guidelines3/5

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

The description gives practical preconditions and refusal cases, such as requiring kicad-cli and how sub-sheets are handled. However, it does not explicitly say when to choose this tool over the sibling run_erc or validate_hierarchy, so the usage guidance is implied rather than comparative.

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