cst_schematic_connect

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

Since annotations are absent, the description must convey behavioral traits. It states that ports are connected into a net but does not disclose side effects (e.g., overwriting existing nets), permissions required, or error conditions. This leaves ambiguity for the agent about safe usage.

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 concise with two sentences: one for purpose and one for example. No extraneous information. It is front-loaded with the action, making it efficient.

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?

The tool has moderate complexity with 3 parameters and no output schema. The description covers the core function and provides an example, but lacks details on return values, error handling, or behavioral constraints. It is adequate but not fully complete for a scheduling tool.

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 already describes all parameters with clear descriptions. The description adds an example of port structure, which aids understanding but does not significantly enhance parameter semantics beyond the schema. Schema description coverage is high, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Connect Design Studio schematic component ports into one net') and provides an example of port entries. It effectively communicates the tool's purpose, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like cst_schematic_call. However, the verb 'connect' and resource 'ports into one net' make the intent clear.

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 (e.g., cst_schematic_create_external_port). There are no prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions stated. The description implies usage context but lacks explicit guidelines.

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