Find EasyEDA Pro component

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one useful scope fact — the search is confined to the active EasyEDA Pro project, not the library or other documents — but says nothing about match semantics (substring vs exact, case sensitivity), result truncation, or ordering, which matter for a search tool.

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 front-loaded sentence with the resource first and the matching criteria after; there is no padding or boilerplate. It is terse to the point of underspecification, but nothing in it is wasted.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should explain what a match looks like and how `limit` truncates results — it does neither. Against annotations that already cover read-only safety and a simple three-parameter schema, it is adequate but leaves meaningful gaps for an agent that must decide how many results to expect.

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 only 33%: only `query` is documented in the schema, and the description's field list largely restates that same text. The `limit` and `timeoutMs` parameters are left undocumented in both places, so the description fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ("Finds a component") and enumerates the searchable attributes (designator, name, value, footprint, property), which is enough to distinguish it from easyeda_find_net or easyeda_get_component_pins. However, it never names easyeda_list_schematic_components or easyeda_navigate_component, so the boundary with the closest siblings must be inferred.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance: nothing says to use this rather than easyeda_list_schematic_components (enumerate all) or easyeda_navigate_component (jump to a known one). Only the implicit framing "by designator, name, value..." hints that this is for text-driven lookup.

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