pcb_calc_trace_width

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the calculation function and does not disclose return format, units, assumptions, limitations, or side effects. The only addition is the IPC-2221 standard reference, which adds minimal behavioral context.

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, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous words. Every word earns its place, and it is appropriately concise for a straightforward calculation tool.

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?

There is no output schema, no annotations, and no parameter descriptions. The description does not specify return units, calculation assumptions, or the role of each parameter. Given the tool's complexity (4 parameters, one enum), the description is under-specified for an agent to invoke it with full confidence.

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%, so the description must compensate. It only hints at 'current capacity' mapping to current_amps, but does not explain temp_rise_c, copper_thickness_oz, or layer_type. The agent gets minimal guidance on parameter meaning beyond the parameter names.

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 uses the specific verb 'Calculate' with a clear resource 'minimum trace width for current capacity' and cites the IPC-2221 standard. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling calculation tools like impedance or skin effect calculators.

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 when trace width for current capacity is needed, but it does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. It is a simple statement of function with no guidance on alternatives or conditions.

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