kicad_ctrl_execute_ripup

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It explains removal of tracks/vias, diff return, optional application, and need for manual rerouting. However, it does not detail side effects, error conditions, or permissions required for this destructive action.

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 with three short sentences plus an important note. It front-loads the core purpose and structures the behavior clearly, with no unnecessary words.

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 an output schema exists and schema descriptions are 100%, the description adequately covers return behavior and manual follow-up. It does not mention prerequisites or error handling, but the tool's role in a sequence and the developer context likely fill these gaps.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context for 'apply_diff' (behavior) and mentions 'tracks/vias' relating to 'net_names', but does not add significant meaning beyond schema 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 the tool removes tracks/vias and returns a diff, using specific verb 'execute rip-up' and resource 'tracks/vias'. It distinguishes from sibling 'kicad_ctrl_propose_ripup' by implying execution after proposal.

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 indicates this is 'Station 3', implying a sequence after proposal, and explains the apply_diff flag. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use vs alternatives or when not to use, leaving some ambiguity.

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