Skip to main content
Glama
EasyEDA Pro MCP

EasyEDA Pro MCP

Prepare Schematic Bus Mutation

easyeda_prepare_schematic_bus
Read-only

Prepares create, modify, or delete operations for schematic multi-bit buses and diagonal bus entries with syntax parsing, coordinate validation, preview, and confirmation-gated writes.

Instructions

Prepares a create, modify, or delete operation on schematic multi-bit buses or diagonal bus entries with syntax parsing, coordinate validation, preview, and exact confirmation phrase. Does not write until confirmed via easyeda_confirmed_action.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
netNoNet name for tapped signal (e.g. 'DATA0')
endXNoEnd X for bus entry tap
endYNoEnd Y for bus entry tap
nameNoBus name with syntax, e.g. 'DATA[0..7]' or 'ADDR[15:0]'
busIdNoTarget bus primitive ID for modify, delete, or attaching bus entry
colorNoBus color string
actionYesBus or bus entry action to perform
startXNoStart X for bus entry tap
startYNoStart Y for bus entry tap
targetNoExpected active schematic target
wireIdNoPrimitive ID of wire connected by bus entry
entryIdNoTarget bus entry primitive ID for delete
rotationNoRotation angle for bus entry
lineWidthNoBus stroke width
timeoutMsNo
coordinatesNoFlat array of coordinates [x1, y1, x2, y2, ...] for bus polyline (min 4 numbers / 2 points)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.4.1

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Goes beyond annotations by disclosing the two-phase prepare/confirm model, that syntax parsing and coordinate validation happen at prepare time, and that a preview plus an exact confirmation phrase are produced. This resolves an apparent tension with readOnlyHint=true (the tool itself stages rather than writes) and notes the destructive actions only land after confirmation. It stops short of saying what happens on validation failure or whether the preview expires.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, zero filler, with the operation scope front-loaded and the confirmation constraint second. Nothing repeats the title mechanically.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 16-parameter, nested-object staging tool with no output schema, the description supplies the critical missing piece: that it returns a preview and requires an exact confirmation phrase via easyeda_confirmed_action. It does not describe error behavior or preview lifetime, which is a minor residual gap rather than a blocking one.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 94%, so parameters are already well documented (bus name syntax, busId scoping, coordinate array format, target object). The description's mention of "syntax parsing, coordinate validation" adds only generic framing rather than per-parameter meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Names a specific verb ("Prepares") plus the exact resources ("schematic multi-bit buses or diagonal bus entries") and enumerates the operation set (create, modify, delete). An agent can distinguish this from easyeda_prepare_schematic_wire or easyeda_prepare_schematic_port purely from the resource nouns, without inspecting either schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly states the workflow condition: nothing is written until confirmed via easyeda_confirmed_action, which routes the agent to the correct follow-up sibling. It does not explicitly say when to prefer this over the wire/port prepare tools, but the resource scoping implies it clearly.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools