kicad.save_project

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses state dependency (requires open project) and write operation nature ('Save'). However, lacks details on atomicity, backup creation, failure modes, or specific return values despite having an 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?

Extremely concise at 11 words. Front-loaded with critical prerequisite '[Requires open project]' followed immediately by action and scope. No redundancy or wasted 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?

Appropriate for a simple save operation with zero parameters. Prerequisite and scope are covered. Output schema exists (per context signals), so return value explanation is unnecessary in the description text.

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?

Zero parameters present; per scoring rules this establishes a baseline of 4. Description correctly offers no parameter details since none exist, and the empty schema requires no semantic elaboration.

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 'Save' with clear resource 'project files' and scope 'schematic + PCB'. Effectively distinguishes from siblings like 'create_project', 'open_project', and 'export_*' tools by specifying native file persistence.

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 explicit prerequisite '[Requires open project]' establishing when the tool can be used. However, lacks explicit mention of alternatives (e.g., distinguishing from export tools for manufacturing outputs) or explicit 'when-not-to-use' guidance beyond the prerequisite.

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