pcb_export_pick_place

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

Discloses that the output is returned as base64, which is useful behavior information. However, no annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It does not mention side effects, permissions, or pagination, which are minimal for an export.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the key action and output format. Every word earns its place with no superfluous content.

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 lack of parameter descriptions, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient for an agent to correctly invoke the tool. Critical details about fileType and unit are missing.

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%, and the description provides no information about any of the three parameters (unit, fileName, fileType). The agent has zero guidance on valid values or semantics.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'Export' and the resource 'pick-and-place (centroid) file for assembly', and specifies the output format 'base64'. This distinguishes it from sibling export tools like pcb_export_gerber or pcb_export_bom.

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?

Provides a prerequisite ('Requires a PCB document active') but offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternative export tools (e.g., pcb_export_bom) or when not to use it.

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