drc_rule_create

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

Annotations are empty, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool performs a write operation on the active .kicad_dru file, but it does not explain whether it overwrites existing rules, how 'update' is determined, any validation behavior, permission requirements, or failure modes.

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 description is a single, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the action and target. It contains no unnecessary words and is appropriately concise for the core purpose.

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 6 parameters, 0% schema descriptions, no annotations, and only a one-sentence description, the tool is severely under-specified. The description does not explain required vs optional parameters, valid values for constraint_type, how create differs from update, or any preconditions beyond 'active .kicad_dru file'. This is inadequate for reliable tool selection and invocation.

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% for 6 parameters, and the description provides no parameter details whatsoever. It does not mention constraint_type, name, severity, condition, min_value, or max_value, leaving the agent without guidance on what each parameter means or how to set them.

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 uses specific verbs 'Create or update' with a clear resource ('custom DRC rule') and location ('active .kicad_dru file'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like drc_rule_delete, drc_rule_enable, and drc_list_rules.

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 usage is implied: use this tool when you need to create or update a custom DRC rule. However, it provides no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives, so it falls short of clear context.

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