pcb_set_stackup

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

The annotation destructiveHint: true already signals destructive behavior. The description adds the 'file-backed profile' mechanism, but it does not explain side effects, reversibility, or how the layers parameter interacts with the profile. This is minimal extra context beyond the annotation.

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 with no filler. It conveys the core action efficiently.

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?

For a destructive setter with one parameter, the description is too sparse. It does not clarify what 'file-backed profile' means, how the layers argument is used, or what the expected output is (even though an output schema exists). An agent would struggle to construct a valid call without additional context.

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%, so the description must compensate. It does not explain the 'layers' parameter structure or its relationship to the file-backed profile. The only hint is that layers relate to stackup, but no details on how to construct the array or what object properties are expected.

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 a specific action: 'Set the active board stackup'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like pcb_get_stackup (retrieval) and si_generate_stackup (generation). The qualifier 'using a file-backed profile' adds context without obscuring the core purpose.

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. There is no mention of when to use this over pcb_get_stackup (for reading) or si_generate_stackup (for generating), nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The context signals show many stackup-related siblings, making usage guidance critical but absent.

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