convert_protel

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses: output is a ZIP containing KiCad files and a conversion report, and .ddb archives require mdbtools, returning a 503 error if unavailable. It does not mention whether the operation is destructive, but conversion typically creates new files without modifying originals.

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 concise and front-loaded: the first sentence clearly states the purpose, followed by necessary details on input types, output, and error conditions. Each sentence adds value without unnecessary repetition.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (file conversion, multiple input types, error handling) and the presence of an output schema, the description is mostly complete. It covers input, output, and a key error case, but could mention potential overwrite behavior for the output path.

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 the description adds value beyond the schema by explaining accepted file formats, the output contents (report), and the special requirement for .ddb files. This enriches the parameter meaning beyond the basic field descriptions.

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 it converts Protel99SE files to KiCad format, specifies accepted file types (.sch, .pcb, .lib, .zip, .ddb), and distinguishes it from sibling converters like convert_allegro or convert_pads through the tool name and 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?

The description explains the tool's context (converts Protel99SE to KiCad 7) and acceptable inputs, but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool over other converters or provide exclusions. No alternatives are mentioned, leaving the agent to rely on tool name differentiation.

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