kicad.get_symbol_info

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 what data is returned (pins, properties, datasheet), which is valuable behavioral context. However, it omits side effects, error conditions (e.g., symbol not found), or whether the operation is read-only.

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?

Extremely concise with zero waste. Single sentence establishing purpose followed immediately by a concrete example. Information is front-loaded appropriately.

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 read-only lookup tool with an output schema (which reduces the need to describe return values), but gaps remain. The 0% input schema coverage is not fully compensated, and there's no mention of error handling or parameter constraints (case sensitivity, special characters).

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 0%, requiring the description to compensate. While the example ('library='Device'', 'symbol='R'') provides implicit hints about parameter values, the description lacks explicit explanations of what constitutes a valid library name or symbol identifier format.

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 clearly states the specific action (Get detailed info), resource (symbol), and scope (pins, properties, datasheet). It effectively distinguishes from sibling 'search_symbols' by emphasizing retrieval of specific symbol details versus searching.

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 an example call but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus 'search_symbols' or prerequisites like library availability. No 'when-not-to-use' or alternative recommendations are included.

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