duplicate_footprint

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions the tool clones an on-board part and gives positioning behavior, but does not state whether original footprint remains, permissions needed, or if operation is reversible.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and context. No filler words, every phrase earns its place.

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?

Covers core action and positioning parameters. Lacks details on return value, error conditions, or prerequisites (e.g., footprint existence). For a 4-param tool with no output schema, this is mostly complete but not fully.

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 has 0% coverage, but description adds meaning for x_mm and y_mm (absolute vs offset). Parameters 'reference' and 'new_reference' are named but not explained beyond their titles, requiring inference.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'copy' and resource 'placed footprint', explains the KiCad workaround context, and distinguishes from siblings like 'duplicate_symbol' and 'move_footprint'.

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?

Explicitly explains when to use: as a workaround for KiCad 9 IPC's inability to place from library. Provides guidance on positioning parameters (absolute vs offset), though lacks explicit when-not-to-use.

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