Get PCB net classes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful content about what data is exposed (net assignments and routing rules), but says nothing about scoping, pagination, or the active-document targeting behavior implied by the nested target object.

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 listing the verb, resource, and returned data with no filler. Slightly dense parenthetical but every element 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?

For a read-only query with no output schema, the description should indicate the shape of returned net-class entries; it mentions categories of data but not structure or volume. Adequate but leaves gaps an agent would need to discover by calling.

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 description coverage is only 50%: 'name' and 'includeRaw' are documented in the schema, but the nested 'target' object (8 fields including documentType enum) and 'timeoutMs' carry no descriptions. The tool description adds no parameter meaning at all, so it 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 and resource ('Lists net classes') plus what is included: member net assignments and routing rules (trace width, clearance, via size). It is fairly distinguishable from siblings like easyeda_get_pcb_net_report or easyeda_get_pcb_differential_pairs, though it never explicitly contrasts with them.

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, no exclusions, and no named alternatives among the many PCB-query siblings. 'On the active PCB' only weakly implies the operating context.

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