kicad.route_trace

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses 'Straight segments only' (crucial behavioral constraint) and project requirement. However, omits mutation nature (creates objects), error conditions, and return value details (though output schema exists).

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?

Excellent front-loading with prerequisite tag followed by core function, constraint, and example. Zero redundant text; every element earns its place in a compact three-segment structure.

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 basic invocation but incomplete given 7 parameters with zero schema documentation. Missing: return value semantics (despite output schema existing), valid layer values, coordinate system details, and 'net' parameter behavior. Minimum viable for a complex routing operation.

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. Description compensates partially with concrete example showing coordinate values, width, and layer format. However, fails to explain 'net' parameter (default empty string), valid layer enumerations, or measurement units, leaving significant semantic gaps.

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?

Clear verb ('Route') and resource ('trace') with specific constraint 'between two points'. 'Straight segments only' distinguishes it from autorouting or curved trace tools. Minor deduction for not explicitly distinguishing from schematic 'add_wire' sibling, though 'trace' implies PCB context.

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 prerequisite '[Requires open project]' at the front. However, lacks guidance on when to use vs alternatives like 'place_via' or 'add_wire', and doesn't mention coordinate system prerequisites or layer requirements.

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