Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
KiCad MCP Pro

KiCad MCP Pro

by Valxyria
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

pcb_get_footprint_layers

Read-onlyIdempotent

List all layers referenced by a PCB footprint, including inner layers, to identify its complete layer usage.

Instructions

List every layer referenced by a footprint block, including inner layers.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "reference": "<reference>"
    },
    "name": "pcb_get_footprint_layers"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
referenceYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.3.2

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds that it lists every layer including inner layers, which is useful but not rich behavioral detail. 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. Every word contributes to the meaning.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The output schema covers return values and annotations cover safety, but the description omits parameter semantics and usage context. Given the tool's simplicity, it is minimally adequate but not fully complete.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The single required parameter 'reference' is not explained in the description. With 0% schema coverage, the description should clarify what a 'footprint block reference' is, but it only uses the term 'footprint block' without defining the reference.

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?

The description clearly states the action (list) and the resource (layers referenced by a footprint block). The qualifier 'including inner layers' adds specificity and distinguishes this from generic layer-listing tools.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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 such as pcb_get_layers or pcb_get_footprints. The description only states what it does, not the intended context or exclusions.

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