eda_pcb_manufacture_data_get_pads_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return type `Promise<File | undefined>` which is useful, but it doesn't explain what 'PADS 文件' means in practice, whether the file is downloaded, what format it is, whether it requires a specific board context, or what happens when no file is available (undefined). The description is minimal and leaves the agent guessing about side effects or prerequisites.

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: a signature line, a Chinese phrase '获取 PADS 文件', and a return type line. It's concise and front-loaded with the essential information. However, it's almost too sparse, mixing English signature and Chinese description, but every line carries some information. It earns a 4 for being compact, though it sacrifices completeness.

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?

Given the tool's complexity is low (2 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what a PADS file is, when to use it, how the optional fileName works, or what the returned File object represents. The sibling context shows many similar get_*_file tools, so an agent needs more context to select this one correctly. The description is too minimal to be fully actionable.

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% for the two parameters (`args` and `windowId`), but the descriptions are generic: '按官方签名顺序排列的JSON参数数组' (JSON parameter array in official signature order) and '目标EDA窗口ID；省略时使用当前活动窗口' (target EDA window ID; omit to use current active window). The description adds the `fileName?: string` signature, which clarifies the first parameter's meaning, but doesn't explain what file names are valid or how to discover them. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema covers the parameters, and the description adds a bit of signature context.

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 verb and resource: '获取 PADS 文件' (get PADS file) and includes the method signature `pcb_ManufactureData.getPadsFile(fileName?: string) -> Promise<File | undefined>`. This clearly identifies the tool as retrieving a PADS file from PCB manufacture data. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from the many sibling `eda_pcb_manufacture_data_get_*_file` tools beyond the PADS file type, which is somewhat inherent in the name.

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. There are many sibling tools like `eda_pcb_manufacture_data_get_gerber_file`, `eda_pcb_manufacture_data_get_dxf_file`, etc., and the description doesn't explain when PADS file is needed or how it differs. The optional `fileName` parameter suggests it might default to something, but no context is given about when to omit it.

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