pcb_net_lengths

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

No annotations provided, so the description must convey behavior. It states the tool lists routed lengths and sorts them, which implies a read-only operation. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, performance implications, or that it is non-destructive. A score of 3 reflects adequate but incomplete disclosure.

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 that fully conveys the tool's purpose and context without unnecessary words. It is efficiently front-loaded and earns its place.

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 absence of an output schema, the description could hint more about the return format (e.g., net name and length). However, it adequately covers the tool's functionality for most agents, and the schema provides parameter details. Slightly incomplete but 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?

All 3 parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), providing basic meaning. The description adds context beyond the schema by noting that patterns match net names and results are sorted by length for bus matching. This added value justifies a score above baseline 3.

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 clearly states it lists routed lengths for nets matching a glob/regex, sorted by length for bus matching review. The verb 'list' and resource 'routed lengths of nets' are specific. This distinguishes it from siblings like pcb_net_route or pcb_highlight_net, which serve different purposes.

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 mentions a use case ('for bus matching review') but does not explicitly exclude other scenarios or compare to alternatives. While the context implies when to use it, there is no 'when not to use' guidance.

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