EasyEDA Pro bridge diagnostics

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds value by detailing the diagnostic scope (bridge, extension, protocol, document context, next steps), which is consistent with annotations and provides actionable transparency.

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 single sentence is well-structured and front-loaded with the core function. It efficiently packs all relevant components without redundancy, earning each part of the description.

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 no output schema, the description adequately lists what the diagnosis covers. It is reasonably complete for a diagnostic tool, though it could hint at the output format (structured) more explicitly.

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?

No parameters are defined, so the description carries no parameter burden. Baseline of 4 is appropriate since there is no need to compensate for schema gaps.

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 returns a structured diagnosis covering specific components (bridge, extension, protocol, document context, next steps). This verb-resource combination is unique among siblings, which focus on actions like export, trace, or navigation.

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 implies the tool is for overall health checks but does not explicitly specify when to use it over alternatives like easyeda_live_status or easyeda_get_context. Usage context is implied but lacks exclusions or comparisons.

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