kicad.add_wire

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It adds valuable behavioral context regarding coordinate exactness, but fails to disclose mutation effects, error conditions, or reference the existing output schema.

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?

Three sentences efficiently structured: purpose first, constraint second, example third. No redundant information; every sentence earns its place.

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?

Adequate for a simple geometric drawing tool with four numeric parameters and an output schema (which excuses return value documentation). However, gaps remain regarding units, grid snapping behavior, and electrical net creation implications.

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 (only titles X1, Y1, etc.). The description compensates partially with a concrete example showing numeric values, though it omits critical context like units (mm vs mils) and coordinate system origin.

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 action (add) and resource (wire) with scope (between two points). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tool 'add_line', which in KiCad is for graphical lines rather than electrical connections.

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?

Provides only the constraint that 'Coordinates must be exact' but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus 'add_line' (graphical) or 'route_trace' (PCB), and omits prerequisites like having an open schematic.

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