Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
KiCad MCP Server

KiCad MCP Server

by brovk2008
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

add_track

Add a straight track segment between two points on any PCB layer, with configurable width, net, and lock.

Instructions

Add a straight 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>",
      "end_x_mm": "<end_x_mm>",
      "end_y_mm": "<end_y_mm>"
    },
    "name": "add_track"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
lockedNo
end_x_mmYes
end_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

C2.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations present, so description should disclose behavior. Only states 'add a straight track segment' without mentioning side effects, layer defaults, or return values. Lacks essential behavioral context.

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?

Single sentence is concise but lacks structure. Could be expanded to include front-loaded key info without becoming verbose.

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 8 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, description is severely incomplete. Does not explain required parameters or post-conditions.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, yet description adds no parameter explanations. Does not clarify meaning of start_x_mm, end_y_mm, locked, net_name, etc.

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?

Description clearly states it adds a straight track segment, differentiating from add_arc_track. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from add_segment, which might also add line segments on different layers.

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 usage guidelines provided. Does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives like add_arc_track or add_segment.

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