list_unrouted_connections

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only mentions 'exported' and 'normalized pad endpoints and lengths'. It does not clarify what 'exported' means, whether the operation is read-only, or any side effects. While 'List' implies read-only, the lack of behavioral context is notable.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. No extra words or filler.

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?

For a tool with two optional filter parameters and no annotation coverage, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the parameters, the meaning of 'exported', or provide usage context. The output schema exists, but parameter semantics and behavioral details are missing, making this barely adequate for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 0%, and the description does not mention the 'nets' or 'path' parameters. The input schema only provides titles and defaults, leaving the agent without any explanation of what these filters mean or how to use them. The description adds no value for parameter understanding.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' with a clear resource ('exported ratlines') and adds detail about output ('normalized pad endpoints and lengths'). This clearly distinguishes from siblings like list_nets (which lists nets) and get_connectivity_graph (which provides full connectivity).

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 usage for viewing unrouted connection ratlines, but provides no explicit when-to-use or alternatives. It doesn't mention exclusions or contrast with list_nets or route_connection. The context is clear enough for a simple list operation, but no guidance is given.

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