Add Wire

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the agent knows this is a non-idempotent, non-destructive local mutation. The description adds nothing on top of that — it does not say what gets mutated, whether the wiring layer must exist, or what happens on duplicate coordinates. With annotations carrying the safety profile, the description is still expected to add context it does not provide.

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?

It is short, but one of its two sentences is meaningless filler ('Exposed as ``add_wire`` by the tool module'), and the remaining text is too sparse to be useful. This is under-specification rather than genuine conciseness.

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 six-parameter, non-idempotent mutation primitive with no output schema and almost no schema documentation, the description leaves essentially everything to inference. Nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly — coordinate semantics, preconditions, side effects — is present.

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 only 17% (only workspace_root is documented) across 6 parameters, five of them required. The description supplies no meaning for x1/y1/x2/y2 — no coordinate units, coordinate space, or orientation — and does not clarify schematic_path versus workspace_root. It makes no attempt to compensate for the low 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 is effectively a restatement of the name and title: 'Add a wire.' It gives no indication of what a wire is in this domain, what it connects, or how it differs from siblings like add_junction, add_net_label, or remove_wire. An agent cannot distinguish the scope of this tool from the other add_* schematic primitives without inspecting the schema.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no preconditions (e.g. a schematic must exist or be loaded), and no mention of alternatives such as remove_wire or add_junction. The second sentence, 'Exposed as ``add_wire`` by the tool module,' is an implementation note that carries no invocation guidance.

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