Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
KiCad MCP Server

KiCad MCP Server

by brovk2008
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

add_arc_track

Add a curved track segment to a PCB board by specifying start, mid, and end coordinates in millimeters, with support for layer, width, net, and locking options.

Instructions

Add an arc track segment to the board.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "start_x_mm": "<start_x_mm>",
      "start_y_mm": "<start_y_mm>",
      "mid_x_mm": "<mid_x_mm>",
      "mid_y_mm": "<mid_y_mm>",
      "end_x_mm": "<end_x_mm>",
      "end_y_mm": "<end_y_mm>"
    },
    "name": "add_arc_track"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
lockedNo
end_x_mmYes
end_y_mmYes
mid_x_mmYes
mid_y_mmYes
net_nameNo
width_mmNo
layer_nameNoF.Cu
start_x_mmYes
start_y_mmYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.2/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Add', implying a mutation, but provides no information about side effects, error handling, undo behavior, or required permissions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single short sentence, making it concise. However, the lack of essential content means it is under-specified rather than appropriately concise.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (10 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain the arc definition (start, mid, end points), the meaning of optional parameters, or the expected behavior.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain the 10 parameters. It offers no parameter info, leaving the agent with only generic schema titles (e.g., 'Start X Mm') which lack context.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb and resource ('Add an arc track segment'), clearly indicating the tool's purpose. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like add_track (straight track) and add_arc (arc shape), but does not explicitly differentiate.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, 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.

Deploy Server

Other Tools