pcb_move_silkscreen

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

由于没有 annotations，描述应承担行为披露职责，但“移动丝印文字”仅复述意图，未说明坐标是绝对位置还是相对偏移、旋转角度的作用方式、是否可撤销或失败情况，行为透明度不足。

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?

描述极简，没有任何冗余信息，符合前置负载要求。但整个描述更像工具名而非结构化说明，虽然简洁不等于缺失，仍因缺少必要补充信息而降一档。

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?

该工具操作简单、参数少且 schema 自解释，也没有 output schema，所以描述无需解释返回值。但缺少对 x/y 是移动目标坐标还是偏移量的明确说明，以及与 pcb_auto_silkscreen 的配合方式，整体上只能算勉强够用。

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?

input-schema 中四个参数均有描述且覆盖率达到 100%，x/y 坐标单位、旋转角度、丝印图元 ID 都已在 schema 中说明。描述本身没有增加参数语义，因此按高覆盖率的基线给 3 分。

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?

描述“移动丝印文字”直接说明动词“移动”和资源“丝印文字”，明确区分于 pcb_move_component、pcb_auto_silkscreen 等同类工具。用途具体、无赘述，不是名称的同义反复。

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?

描述没有提供任何使用时机或上下文，未说明何时应使用本工具而不是 pcb_move_component、pcb_auto_silkscreen 或 pcb_batch_move，也没有给出前置条件或替代工具建议。

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