kicad-mcp-layer

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

sch_get_symbol

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves full details for a placed schematic symbol—pin numbers, names, electrical types, and sheet positions—so you can wire the correct connections.

Instructions

One placed symbol in full, with every pin's number, name, electrical type and sheet position, which is what you need to wire to it.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "schematic_path": "<schematic_path>",
      "ref": "<ref>"
    },
    "name": "sch_get_symbol"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ref`	Yes	Reference designator, e.g. U1.
`schematic_path`	Yes	The .kicad_sch sheet the symbol is on.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`dnp`	No
`ref`	Yes
`pins`	No
`unit`	Yes
`uuid`	Yes
`x_mm`	Yes
`y_mm`	Yes
`value`	No
`lib_id`	Yes
`mirror`	No
`rotation`	Yes
`footprint`	No
`properties`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds only what content is returned (pins with numbers/names/types/positions), which is largely redundant with the output schema; it adds little behavioral context beyond annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single sentence that front-loads the resource and its returned detail, with the use-case clause last. Every clause contributes; nothing is wasted.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the simple retrieval scope, full schema coverage, rich annotations, and an output schema, the description supplies enough to call the tool correctly. It could mention error behavior for a missing ref, but that is a minor omission for a read-only getter.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, with both required parameters (schematic_path, ref) documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax or format details for ref or path, so the schema carries the burden and baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific resource ('one placed symbol') and enumerates the returned pin attributes (number, name, electrical type, sheet position), so an agent knows it retrieves a single symbol's full pin-out. It does not name sibling tools such as sch_list_components or sym_info to differentiate, but the scope is unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides a clear use case – 'what you need to wire to it' – which tells the agent to call it when pin-level wiring data for a specific placed symbol is required. It offers no explicit exclusions or named alternatives, so the agent must infer that list-level tools are for enumeration.

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