kicad_ctrl_export

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral transparency. It only states that a ZIP is downloaded, but omits details like whether files are overwritten, temporary storage, or required permissions. The side effects and exact behavior of the export are unclear.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no extraneous information. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function.

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?

While the description covers the main action, it lacks details about the output schema (though one exists), such as what files are included in the ZIP or how errors are reported. Given the tool's complexity (exporting multiple file types), the description is adequate but not thorough.

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%, meaning both parameters have descriptions in the schema. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., project_path types, output_dir default). Therefore, the description offers no extra parameter clarity, resulting in a baseline score.

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 'Export' and specifies the resources: gerbers, drill files, and positions. It also mentions downloading a ZIP of fabrication files, leaving no ambiguity about the tool's function. Among sibling tools starting with 'kicad_ctrl', this is distinctly the export function.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'kicad_ctrl_analyze' or 'kicad_ctrl_validate'. It does not mention any prerequisites, context, or exclusions. Given the large number of sibling tools, explicit usage guidelines are missing.

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