convert_pads

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses use of kicad-cli for import, output format as ZIP with .kicad_pcb file, and input format. It does not mention side effects, auth needs, or error conditions, but conversion tools are typically non-destructive and the description covers the core behavior.

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?

The description is four sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and every sentence adds essential information. No unnecessary words or fluff.

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?

Despite having an output schema (as noted in context signals), the description independently explains the output format (ZIP archive containing .kicad_pcb). It also mentions the underlying tool (kicad-cli) and the input limitations, making it fully informative for this conversion tool.

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 is 100% and description repeats the schema info but adds value by specifying the default output naming pattern '<stem>_kicad.zip next to input' for the output_path parameter, which is not in the 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'convert', specifies the source format 'PADS ASCII .asc layout file' and target format 'KiCad format'. It also distinguishes from sibling conversion tools by naming the specific source format and noting board-only support.

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?

The description explicitly says 'Board files only — schematics are not supported,' which provides clear usage context. However, it does not name alternative tools or provide explicit 'when to use' guidance beyond the format and board scope.

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