eda_get_project_info

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

Description states 'Read' indicating non-destructive operation, but with no annotations, it falls short on details like requirements (e.g., project must be open), side effects, or error conditions.

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?

Single sentence, 15 words, front-loaded with verb 'Read'. No wasted words.

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?

No output schema, but description conveys return structure (tree with boards, schematics, pages, UUIDs, metadata). Could elaborate on format or limitations, but adequate for a simple read 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?

Input schema has zero parameters, so baseline is 4. Description adds no param info, which is acceptable as there are none.

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 specifies verb 'Read', resource 'EasyEDA project tree', and details contents (boards, schematics, pages with UUIDs, metadata). Clearly distinguishes from siblings like eda_status, eda_open_document, and multiple pcb_/sch_ tools.

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?

Implied usage for retrieving project structure, but no mention of when to use vs alternatives (e.g., eda_status, eda_open_document) or prerequisites like having an open project.

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