pcb_current_capacity

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

With no annotations, the description alone must convey behavior. It transparently discloses the method (IPC-2221), sorting order, and pattern matching. It does not mention potential side effects, but as a read-only estimation tool, this is acceptable.

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 sentence with no wasted words, front-loading the core purpose and key details like sorting and standard used.

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?

While there is no output schema, the description covers the main behavior and sorting. It lacks details on the return format (e.g., units, fields), but overall it is sufficiently complete for a simple estimation 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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context about IPC-2221 and sorting order but does not provide additional meaning for individual parameters beyond what the schema already offers.

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 estimates current capacity for nets using IPC-2221 formulas, with a glob/regex pattern and sorted weakest first. It distinctly sets the tool apart from siblings like pcb_net_lengths or pcb_impedance_estimate.

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 the usage context (estimating current capacity for PCB nets) but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention 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.