Generate Wiring Diagram

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

With no annotations, the description effectively discloses key behaviors: auto-generation of protection components when both batteries and loads are provided, and details about output format (SVG vs PNG) with rendering notes. No contradictions.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences plus one line of behavioral detail, front-loaded with purpose and return type. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 tool with 5 parameters (1 required) and no output schema, the description covers purpose, return type, output format behavior, and a key auto-generation rule. It is complete for effective use.

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 100%, but the description adds significant value by explaining the auto-generation rule and providing regional voltage guidance for charger input voltage, enhancing parameter understanding beyond the schema.

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 tool generates electrical wiring diagrams for specific contexts (campers, boats, off-grid setups) and distinguishes itself from sibling calculation tools by focusing on diagram generation.

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?

Usage is clear for generating diagrams, but no explicit guidance on when not to use it or comparison with siblings is provided. However, the context makes it evident that this is for diagram output, not calculations.

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