pcb_refill_zones

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

With empty annotations, the description carries full burden, but it only says 'Refill all copper zones.' It does not disclose that this is a mutating operation, may discard existing fills, requires a board to be open, or can affect DRC results. The behavioral implications of 'refill' are left implicit.

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, concise sentence with no filler. It directly states the action and target, making it efficiently front-loaded.

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?

Despite low complexity and an output schema, the description lacks important context such as prerequisites, side effects, and when to invoke it. An agent would not know if this modifies the board permanently or if it should be run before manufacturing checks. This leaves the tool under-specified.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so the description need not explain any. Baseline 4 applies. The description adds nothing about parameters because there are none to describe.

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 'Refill all copper zones' uses a specific verb (refill) and resource (copper zones), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like pcb_add_zone or pcb_get_zones. It states the scope ('all') and the action, making it fully unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool, when not to use it, or alternatives. The description only states what it does, leaving the agent to infer that it should be used after editing zones or before export. No explicit context is provided.

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