pcb_move_component

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It correctly implies a mutating action ('move') and includes the unit 'mil', but does not disclose whether a document must be open, whether the change is reversible, what happens on an invalid designator, or what the tool returns.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states the action, target, and unit efficiently, earning its place despite being minimal.

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?

This is a minimum-viable description for a simple move operation: the action is clear and the schema covers all parameters. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it lacks details about prerequisites, coordinate system origin, or expected response, leaving meaningful gaps for an agent.

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 100%, so the schema already documents designator, x, y, and rotation. The top-level description adds only 'mil' and 'specified coordinates', which adds minimal value beyond the parameter descriptions. This matches the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 a specific action ('move'), a resource ('component'), and a target ('specified coordinates'), so an agent can understand the core function. However, it does not distinguish this tool from the similarly named sibling 'pcb_relocate_component', so it cannot fully clarify which one to choose.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as pcb_batch_move, pcb_relocate_component, or pcb_move_silkscreen. It does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or typical contexts, leaving the agent to 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.