easyeda_navigate_regionNavigate to specific coordinates or a rectangular region in the active EasyEDA Pro PCB or document to focus the view for inspection and editing.
Navigates to coordinates or a rectangular region in the active EasyEDA Pro PCB/document.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| x | No | ||
| y | No | ||
| top | No | ||
| left | No | ||
| right | No | ||
| bottom | No | ||
| timeoutMs | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.4.1Input schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"v1.0.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, non-destructive, and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful scope detail that navigation applies to the 'active' document, but it says nothing about units, whether the viewport only changes, or what timeoutMs governs.
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 no filler, which is the right shape. It is short to the point of under-specifying rather than being bloated.
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?
With seven undocumented parameters, zero required fields, and no output schema, the definition leaves too much implicit for an agent to call it reliably. It needs at minimum the coordinate/rectangle mode semantics and the timeout behavior.
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 0%, so the description must carry the parameter burden and does not. It only hints that x/y mean a point and top/left/right/bottom a rectangle, leaving units, whether the two modes are mutually exclusive, and the meaning of timeoutMs entirely undocumented.
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?
Names a specific verb ('Navigates to') and resource ('coordinates or a rectangular region in the active EasyEDA Pro PCB/document'), so the action is unambiguous. It does not distinguish itself from near-siblings such as easyeda_zoom_board or easyeda_navigate_component, which also move the viewport.
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 on when to choose this over easyeda_zoom_board or easyeda_navigate_component, nor any preconditions such as requiring an active PCB document. The agent must infer selection from the name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.