open_in_kicad

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It only states the action but does not describe what happens (e.g., blocks until KiCad exits? Returns immediately? Requires file existence? No behavioral details are given for this external app launch.

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 a single, clear sentence with no wasted words. While it is concise, it could benefit from additional context (e.g., file format), but the brevity is acceptable for a simple action.

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?

For a tool that opens an external application, the description is minimal. It does not mention return behavior, error conditions, or side effects. Given the lack of annotations and a simple task, it is marginally adequate but leaves 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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for the single parameter 'project_path' with 'Path to KiCad project file'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 'Open a KiCad project in the KiCad application' clearly states the verb (open), resource (KiCad project), and target application (KiCad). It distinguishes from sibling tools like analyze_kicad_project or find_kicad_projects.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites (e.g., KiCad must be installed). The usage context is implied but not elaborated.

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