Fetches all PCB design rule configurations from the active EDA window, enabling review and validation of DRC settings for your board.
pcb_Drc.getAllRuleConfigurations(includeSystem?: boolean) -> Promise<Array<Record<string, any>>> 获取所有设计规则配置 returns: 所有设计规则配置
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| args | No | 按官方签名顺序排列的JSON参数数组 | |
| windowId | No | 目标EDA窗口ID；省略时使用当前活动窗口 |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only reveals the return type (Promise<Array<Record<string, any>>>) and the optional includeSystem argument, but does not explain the flag's effect, whether the operation is read-only, or any error/edge-case behavior.
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 very short and front-loads the signature, which is good. However, it is redundant: the return type appears in both the signature and the Chinese 'returns' line, and the minimal wording leaves no room for the explanatory content that is actually needed.
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 getter, but with no annotations and no output schema, the description must provide more context. It fails to clarify the includeSystem flag's semantics, whether system rule configurations are included by default, or how this tool fits among the many DRC rule-configuration siblings, leaving an agent under-informed.
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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the function signature 'getAllRuleConfigurations(includeSystem?: boolean)', which names and types the first positional argument in the args array, but it does not explain the meaning or default behavior of includeSystem, so only marginal value is added beyond the schema.
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 states the operation: 'pcb_Drc.getAllRuleConfigurations' and '获取所有设计规则配置' (get all design rule configurations), making the verb and resource explicit. The word 'all' helps differentiate it from sibling DRC getters like get_current_rule_configuration and get_rule_configuration, though it does not explicitly name them.
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?
No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor is there any explanation of the includeSystem parameter or when to set it. The description gives no context about whether system configurations are included by default or when the caller might need this tool over a single-configuration getter.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.