kicad.fill_zones

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses the open-project prerequisite and workflow dependencies, but lacks details on idempotency, whether changes persist to disk immediately, or what the output schema contains (though output schema exists separately).

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 efficient sentences: prerequisite constraint, core action, and workflow context. No redundant words; critical constraint '[Requires open project]' is front-loaded.

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 zero parameters and existence of output schema, description adequately covers the essential domain context (zones are PCB copper pours needing fill before manufacturing exports). Could benefit from noting idempotency or memory vs. disk persistence, but sufficient for tool selection.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters, establishing baseline 4 per rubric. No parameters require semantic clarification.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Fill' with resource 'zones' and scope 'all'. The mention of DRC and Gerber export dependencies clearly distinguishes this preprocessing step from sibling export/verification tools like kicad.export_gerbers and kicad.run_drc.

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?

Explicitly states the prerequisite '[Requires open project]' and provides clear sequencing guidance 'Must be done before DRC or Gerber export', indicating exactly when in the workflow this tool should be invoked.

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