kicad.add_text

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the prerequisite (open project needed) and implies mutation ('Add'), but lacks details on error handling, coordinate units, layer validation, or whether duplicate text creation is idempotent.

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?

Every sentence earns its place: prerequisite warning first, then purpose statement, followed by a compact, illustrative example. No redundancy or filler text.

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 output schema exists, return values need no explanation. However, for a 4-parameter PCB tool with 0% schema coverage, the description should enumerate valid layer options or coordinate system details; the example alone is insufficient for complete parameter understanding.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. The embedded example provides implicit semantics for all 4 parameters, but explicit documentation of coordinate units, valid layer strings, and text constraints is missing.

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 specific action ('Add text') and target resource ('PCB silkscreen or other layer'), effectively distinguishing this from schematic-related siblings like add_global_label or add_net_label which handle schematic text.

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 '[Requires open project]' prefix establishes a clear prerequisite, but the description lacks guidance on when to use this versus alternatives (e.g., when to use add_text vs labeling features in add_component) or when not to use it.

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