pcb_crop

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It explains default layers based on the targeting mode and that output is ImageContent. However, it does not mention error handling, performance, or the exact nature of ImageContent (e.g., base64 encoding). The schema covers the pixel size cap.

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 paragraph of three sentences, efficiently front-loading the main action and then listing the targeting options. Every sentence serves a purpose with 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?

For an 11-parameter tool with 100% schema coverage, the description provides necessary context on targeting modes and default layers. It lacks clarification on whether the output is always saved to disk or returned as content, but the schema hints at output_dir. Overall fairly complete.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the grouping of parameters into three targeting methods and how layers default differently per method. This clarifies parameter interdependencies beyond the schema.

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 renders a 2D PNG crop of a PCB region and specifies three distinct targeting methods (reference, net, explicit coordinates). The purpose is specific and distinguishable from sibling tools like pcb_render, which likely renders the full board.

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 explicitly says 'Select exactly one target' and explains the three targeting options with their respective parameters. While it does not mention exclusions or alternatives, the context is clear enough for an AI agent to choose the correct mode.

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