mfg_panelize

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

Annotations include destructiveHint=true, so the agent already knows this is destructive. The description adds useful context (kikit installation, output path defaults) but does not clarify what exactly gets destroyed (e.g., whether the active PCB is modified or a new file is created). No contradiction with annotations.

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 well-structured with purpose, args, and return sections. Every sentence earns its place, covering installation, parameters, and return value concisely given the need to document 6 parameters.

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?

The description covers all parameters, return value, and installation requirement. However, it leaves some ambiguity about destructive side effects and the meaning of 'output_dir', which could matter for a destructive open-world tool. Overall it is largely complete.

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%, yet the description's Args section thoroughly documents all 6 parameters, including layout types (grid, mousebites, vcut), numeric meanings, and the default output path. This fully compensates for the schema 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?

The description clearly states the tool panelizes the active PCB using KiKit, creating a panel for efficient PCB fabrication. This distinguishes it from sibling mfg_* tools that handle imports, test plans, or release manifests.

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 description implies usage for PCB fabrication ('Creates a panel of multiple boards for efficient PCB fabrication') but does not explicitly state when to use it vs alternatives or provide exclusions. It mentions the kikit install prerequisite but lacks direct 'when-to-use/when-not-to-use' guidance.

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