pcb_export_3d_pdf

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

The annotation openWorldHint=true hints at side effects, but the description adds no behavioral context such as file creation, overwrite behavior, or default output location. It does not contradict annotations, but the low additional value warrants a below-average score.

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, efficient sentence with no filler. It is appropriately concise for a simple tool, though it sacrifices detail that other dimensions need.

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?

Although an output schema exists, the description fails to cover essential context like the effect of board_only, the role of output_path, and any prerequisites for the active PCB. This makes the tool under-specified for correct 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%, and the description provides no explanation of the two parameters (board_only, output_path). The agent cannot infer what board_only controls or what happens when output_path is empty.

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 action (export), the target resource (active PCB), and the output format (KiCad 10 3D PDF). This is specific enough to distinguish from sibling export tools like export_pcb_pdf or export_3d_step.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without explicit decision support.

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