move_footprint

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavior. It adds 'single undo step' but omits side effects (e.g., overwriting position), failure conditions, or whether operation is absolute/relative. Insufficient for a mutation tool.

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, no redundant words. Essential info front-loaded: action, resource, coordinates, undo. Very efficient.

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?

Missing critical context: footprint existence, coordinate origin, absolute vs relative movement, error states. No output schema or annotations to supplement. Incomplete for a 3-required-param tool.

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%, so description must compensate. It explains units for x_mm and y_mm (mm), but does not clarify 'reference' (likely a footprint designator). Adds some value but incomplete.

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 the action (move), resource (footprint), and destination (x, y in mm) on the live board. It also mentions undo step, distinguishing it from related tools like rotate_footprint or duplicate_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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, no prerequisites (e.g., footprint must exist), and no exclusions. Only implicit usage from purpose.

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