route_tune_time_domain

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

With no annotations, the description is the only source of behavioral info. It states the rule is 'inspired by KiCad 10' and has a 'length fallback', but doesn't explain side effects, whether it modifies PCB design rules, or what the fallback entails. This is a creation tool with no disclosure of project impact.

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?

A single sentence with no redundancy, front-loading the action and key modifiers. Every word earns its place without being over-specified.

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 creation tool with no annotations, the description leaves out critical context: what file/project it affects, prerequisites, and behavior of the fallback. The presence of an output schema doesn't compensate for the missing operational 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 coverage is 0%, and the description adds no parameter information. The parameters are self-explanatory by name but the 'length fallback' hints at a length parameter that isn't present, creating confusion. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 uses a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('time-domain tuning rule'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like route_tune_length by mentioning 'time-domain' and 'length fallback'. However, 'KiCad 10-inspired' is vague and could confuse.

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 time-domain tuning with a length fallback, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over length tuning or other SI tools. No alternatives are named.

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