mcp-server-kicad

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

place_component

Add resistors, capacitors, ICs, and other symbols from any library to a KiCad schematic at specified coordinates with reference, value, rotation, and mirror.

Instructions

Place a schematic symbol: resistor, capacitor, inductor, diode, LED, transistor, crystal, switch, connector, or an IC such as a microcontroller or regulator chip. Any lib_id in a library works.

Args:
    lib_id: Library identifier (e.g. "Device:R", "Device:C", "MyLib:MyPart")
    reference: Reference designator (e.g. "R1", "U1")
    value: Component value (e.g. "10K", "100nF")
    x: X position in schematic units (mm)
    y: Y position in schematic units (mm)
    rotation: Rotation angle in degrees (0, 90, 180, 270)
    symbol_lib_path: Path to a .kicad_sym file that defines the symbol, for a
        library outside KiCad's stock set. Optional; omit to load the symbol
        from the stock library named by the lib_id prefix.
    mirror: Mirror axis ("x", "y", or "" for none)
    schematic_path: Path to .kicad_sch file. Optional; omit to use the configured default.
    project_path: Path to .kicad_pro file (for correct hierarchy resolution in sub-sheets)

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`x`	Yes
`y`	Yes
`value`	Yes
`lib_id`	Yes
`mirror`	No
`rotation`	No
`reference`	Yes
`project_path`	No
`schematic_path`	No
`symbol_lib_path`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv0.17.1Aug 12, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / mirror / enum
```
Added value: +[
+  "",
+  "x",
+  "y"
+]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / rotation / enum
```
Added value: +[
+  0,
+  90,
+  180,
+  270
+]
```
- changedInput schema / properties / rotation / type
```
Previous value: -"number"New value: +"integer"
```
First observedv0.9.1Jun 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare write/no-destroy/non-idempotent/openWorld=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context on the optional path arguments (stock vs external symbol loading, default schematic) but never mentions that repeated calls create duplicate symbols or how errors surface, leaving behavioral gaps for a mutation tool.

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?

Front-loads the purpose sentence, then a clean per-argument list. The Args block re-enumerates all schema fields, which is somewhat duplicative, but each line carries an example or default explanation and the overall size is reasonable for a 10-parameter tool.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

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 explained, and the description plus annotations cover the input contract for a 10-param tool well. Missing only edge-case behavior (duplicate symbols, invalid lib_id handling) to be fully complete.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: every parameter gets a concrete example and format (e.g. "Device:R", "10K", mm units, degrees, mirror axis, path semantics for external libraries). The only shortfall is that the coordinate origin/reference frame for x/y is not defined.

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?

States a specific verb (Place) and resource (schematic symbol) and enumerates concrete component kinds plus the general rule that any lib_id works. This cleanly separates it from PCB-side siblings like place_footprint and from add_symbol/remove_component.

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?

Implicitly signals usage through detailed argument documentation and the note that any lib_id is valid, but never states when to choose this over alternatives (e.g. place_footprint vs place_component) or any preconditions. Usage must be inferred.

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

Deploy Server