pcb_analyze_thermal

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states a generic 'Analyze' operation without noting whether it is read-only, what calculations are performed, what the output looks like, or any assumptions about thermal models. This is insufficient for safe tool invocation.

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 a single, concise sentence with no wasted words. It is not overly verbose, though it borders on under-specification. It is efficiently front-loaded with the core action and subject.

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?

For a tool with four parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far from complete. It does not clarify the analysis methodology, required inputs, or expected returns, making it insufficient for an agent to confidently select and invoke this tool among many thermal-analysis siblings.

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 only 25% (one parameter described). The tool description itself does not explain any of the four parameters or their units, leaving users to guess how power_watts, ambient_temp_c, and max_junction_temp_c fit into the thermal analysis. This fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 a verb (Analyze) and a resource (thermal dissipation for a component), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like pcb_analyze_thermal_via that target vias specifically. However, it doesn't elaborate on what metrics are analyzed, leaving some ambiguity about the exact scope.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus other thermal analysis tools in the sibling list, such as pcb_analyze_thermal_via or pcb_analyze_copper_spreading. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative recommendations.

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