trace_hierarchical_net

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds the behavior of 'following hierarchical pins and labels' but does not disclose any other traits. With annotations covering safety, the description provides minimal added value.

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 with two sentences for purpose and a clear list of parameters. No unnecessary information, every sentence adds value.

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 presence of an output schema, return values need not be detailed. However, the description lacks information about optionality of schematic_path, error conditions, or prerequisite state (e.g., schematic must be open). It is adequate but not complete.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description adds meaningful explanations for both parameters: net_name (net/label name) and schematic_path (path to root file). This compensates for missing schema descriptions, though it could specify that schematic_path is optional.

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's purpose: tracing a net across hierarchy following hierarchical pins and labels. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_net_connections and list_cross_sheet_nets by focusing on hierarchical traversal.

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?

The description implies usage for hierarchical net tracing but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_net_connections or list_cross_sheet_nets. No exclusions or context are given.

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