Get KiCad Schematic

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the 'exactly one' constraint and the compact output format, but does not mention error behavior, permissions, or side effects. For a read-only getter, this is adequate but not rich.

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 concise at two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. The second sentence about docs is somewhat tangential but still relevant and brief.

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?

For a simple one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description adequately summarizes the output and scope. It could mention error handling or path format, but the complexity is low and the description is sufficient.

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 100% with a clear path description. The description adds the 'exactly one' scope but does not provide additional syntax or format details beyond the schema, making it baseline.

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 the tool gets exactly one .kicad_sch file and produces a compact component and net list, specifying the verb, resource, and output. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like extract_circuit or component_search.

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 implies usage for retrieving a single schematic file but does not explicitly compare with alternatives or state exclusions. The pointer to /app/docs/SKILL.md provides general workflow context but not direct selection guidance.

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