Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
KiCad MCP Server

KiCad MCP Server

by brovk2008
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_shape

Retrieve details of a specific graphic shape in a PCB layout using its unique identifier to inspect or modify shape properties.

Instructions

Get details of a specific graphic shape by its ID.

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": {
      "shape_id": "<shape_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_shape"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
shape_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It says 'get details' but does not disclose what details are returned, whether it is read-only, or any side effects. Minimal behavioral disclosure.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Single sentence, 10 words, front-loaded with action. No unnecessary words; every part contributes to the purpose.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple tool with 1 parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate. It states the basic action, but lacks context on output format or prerequisites like how to get a shape ID.

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%. The description does not add any meaning to the shape_id parameter beyond its name. No guidance on format, source, or how to obtain the ID.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states it retrieves details of a specific graphic shape by ID, with a specific verb (get) and resource (graphic shape). It distinguishes itself from sibling get_* tools by specifying 'graphic shape' and requiring an ID.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_shapes or move_shape. Usage is implied (when you have a shape ID), but no when-not or alternative tools are mentioned.

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