pcb_export_gerbers

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

With no annotations, the description does not disclose side effects (e.g., writing files, creating directories) or any preconditions. 'Export' implies file writes, but no detail is provided, and there is no mention of output location or potential overwriting.

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?

A single, focused sentence with no redundancy, front-loading the action and the key detail (one-file-per-layer). Every word earns its place.

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?

The tool is simple (2 params) and has an output schema, but with no annotations and no parameter descriptions, the description is thin. It covers the core purpose but omits context like output location, behavior, and side effects.

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?

Neither the description nor the schema (coverage 0%) explains the 'board' or 'out_dir' parameters. The description does not connect parameters to behavior, leaving the agent with zero parameter semantics beyond names.

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 action ('Export'), the resource ('Gerbers'), and a distinguishing format ('one-file-per-layer'), which sets it apart from other export tools like pcb_export_drill or pcb_export_step.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., pcb_export_drill for drill files, pcb_export_step for STEP models). The description only states what it does, leaving usage decisions to the agent.

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