pcb_get_silkscreens

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

No annotations are present, so the description is the sole behavioral disclosure. '查询' implies a non-destructive read, but it does not state what attributes of the silkscreen text are returned (e.g., text content, position, layer), nor whether it filters by layer or board side. This leaves the agent uncertain about output format and scope.

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, front-loaded with the verb and resource. It contains no filler or redundant information, making it easy to parse.

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 zero-parameter getter, the description is minimal but lacks any indication of the return structure, such as whether it returns an array of text strings with coordinates or layers. Since there is no output schema, this information would be needed to fully understand the tool's behavior, though the low complexity keeps the gap small.

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 zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% by vacuity. With no parameters to document, the description does not need to add parameter semantics; baseline 4 applies.

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 a specific verb '查询' (query) with a clear resource '所有丝印文字' (all silkscreen text), indicating a read operation. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like pcb_move_silkscreen and pcb_auto_silkscreen, which are mutating or placement operations.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as pcb_get_tracks or pcb_get_pads. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative suggestions, so agents must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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