add_component

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

The description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond the basic action. With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but fails to mention side effects, state changes, or constraints (e.g., uniqueness of component_id, interaction with existing components).

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, very concise. While it is minimal, it is not verbose and avoids unnecessary words. However, it may be too brief for a tool with 6 parameters, but it scores well on conciseness.

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 complexity (6 parameters, 2 required, no output schema or annotations), the description is inadequate. It does not explain valid component types, position semantics, direction effects, or any uniqueness constraints. The schema provides some detail but the description should add context.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, so the schema already explains each parameter. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description neither improves nor degrades 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 clearly states the verb 'add' and the resource 'component to circuit diagram', making the purpose obvious. It is unambiguous and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'add_spacer' and 'connect_components', though not explicitly.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or context. The description does not mention when to use 'add_component' over 'add_spacer' or other tools.

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