list_schematic_nets

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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states 'from the exported netlist,' which implies the tool operates on an exported netlist rather than the live schematic—a useful behavioral hint. However, it does not explicitly state whether it is read-only, requires prior exports, or returns the entire netlist. For a simple listing tool, this is adequate but not thorough.

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 that front-loads the purpose. No unnecessary words or filler. Every word serves a purpose.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema and only one parameter, the description should at least explain the project parameter and summarize the output. It explains neither. The tool might be simple, but the description leaves out key context 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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention the only parameter ('project'). It provides no explanation of what the project string represents or how it is used. The description adds zero semantic value beyond the schema's type and required status.

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 'List nets with their fan-out (node count), from the exported netlist.' It specifies the verb (List), the resource (nets), and a distinctive detail (fan-out/node count), which differentiates it from siblings like list_schematic_components or trace_net.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., trace_net, list_schematic_components). It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an exported netlist first) or exclusions. Usage context is entirely implied by the one-line description.

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