sch_create_netlabel

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that the label binds to a wire, but it does not disclose whether the wire must already exist, what happens if placement coordinates are invalid, whether orientation has a default, or any side effects of the operation.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the core operation and includes a useful parenthetical about wire binding. There is no redundant or filler content.

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 creation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. It does not cover prerequisites (wire existence), behavior when the wire is absent, orientation default, or what the tool returns. An agent would need additional information to invoke it reliably in ambiguous situations.

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 schema already describes all parameters at 100% coverage, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds meaningful context by clarifying that the label is bound to a wire, which implies that the x/y coordinates must correspond to wire positions. This goes beyond the schema's minimal 'X 坐标' / 'Y 坐标' descriptions.

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 states the specific action ('放置网络标号' – place a net label) and its required context ('绑定到导线上' – bound to a wire). It clearly identifies the resource as a schematic net label, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like sch_create_component, sch_create_wire, and sch_create_junction.

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 when to use this tool: when a net label needs to be placed on a wire in the schematic. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, so the guidance is only implicit rather than explicit.

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