list_nets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states the operation (listing nets) but does not explicitly mention that it is read-only, how it handles missing boards, the format of glob patterns, or any potential side effects. The absence of such details leaves the agent without a complete behavioral picture.

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 that is front-loaded with the primary action 'List nets' and includes the key optional filter. Every word adds value, and there is no redundant information or filler.

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 simple tool, but without annotations or an output schema, the description must explain the expected return and any constraints. It does not describe what information is returned for each net, how limit interacts with the results, or any error conditions, making the tool's behavior incomplete 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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It explains that 'name' filters by glob pattern, but it entirely omits the 'limit' parameter, which controls the maximum number of results. With one parameter unexplained, the description only partially compensates for the missing schema 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 clearly identifies the tool as listing nets on the open board, with an optional filter by glob pattern. It uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('nets'), and the mention of nets distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_tracks_vias and list_zones.

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 only 'on the open board' as context, implying the tool operates on the current board, but it gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives or any exclusions. There is no mention of scenarios where this tool is not appropriate or when a sibling tool would be preferred.

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