ModelSim bin 工具直通 (受护栏)

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It does disclose that output is extracted and that any bin exe can be probed with -help/-version, and the title hints at guardrails. However, it does not explain side effects (e.g., vlib/vmap may mutate libraries, vcover may write coverage data) or what '受护栏' actually enforces, leaving meaningful behavioral ambiguity for an execution tool.

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?

Two dense, front-loaded sentences with concrete exe examples and an explicit exclusion. Every sentence adds value and there is no filler.

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 passthrough execution tool, the description covers scope, exclusions, probing strategy, and output extraction. With no output schema, it could more explicitly describe the returned structure beyond '提取后的输出', but the detail enum (summary/full) partially addresses granularity.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all six parameters. The description adds useful examples and probing guidance but does not need to compensate for parameter gaps; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: run utility exes (vlib/vmap/vdir/vcover/wlf2vcd/etc.) in the ModelSim bin directory and return extracted output. The description explicitly distinguishes this from compile/sim tools by naming fpga_msim_compile/sim/do as dedicated alternatives, so an agent can tell it apart from siblings.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use guidance: library/coverage/waveform/tool exes belong here, while vlog/vcom/vsim do not and have dedicated tools. It also mentions probing any exe with -help/-version, which is actionable context for exploring unknown utilities.

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