pcb_detect_interfaces

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It does mention that it returns pin counts and associated nets, which adds output context. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or that it relies on an existing session from pcb_parse_layout, leaving some behavioral aspects implicit.

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 that names the action and key outputs without extraneous detail. It is concise and well-structured.

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers the purpose and main outputs. It could elaborate on the result structure or prerequisites, but the simplicity of the tool makes the description sufficient for selection and invocation.

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?

The single parameter session_id is fully described in the schema as 'Session ID from pcb_parse_layout', so the description doesn't need to add much. The description mentions associated nets but doesn't clarify how they relate to the parameter, so no additional semantic value is provided.

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 detects high-speed interfaces and enumerates specific types (DDR, PCIe, USB, Ethernet, LVDS, RF), plus the output (pin counts, nets). This distinguishes it from sibling analysis tools that target individual interfaces, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives like pcb_analyze_pcie or pcb_classify_nets. The description does not mention prerequisites such as having a parsed layout session or expected next steps.

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