convert_kicad_version

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

Despite no annotations, description fully discloses behavioral traits: downconversion, conversion of rounded rectangles to right-angle, removal of hatched fills, and version header update. This is critical for lossy operations.

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?

Five sentences, no fluff. First sentence front-loads purpose. Each sentence adds specific information about file types, versions, and transformations.

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?

Covers essential behaviors for a conversion tool with output schema present. Could benefit from mentioning error conditions or limitations, but otherwise complete for agent decision-making.

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 coverage 100% provides baseline 3. Description adds meaning by listing exact file types (.kicad_pcb, .kicad_sch, .zip) and explaining output_path default naming convention, which is valuable context beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states the tool converts KiCad files to older versions, specifies file types and target versions, and describes the transformations. Distinct from sibling conversion tools (e.g., convert_allegro) which handle different formats.

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?

Implies usage for fab shop compatibility, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, nor provides when-not-to-use guidance. With many sibling conversion tools, explicit context would help.

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