eda_pcb_net_get_netlist

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals a Promise<string> return and 'netlist data', but does not state whether this is a safe read, whether an active PCB document is required, what type values are valid, 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 API signature, followed by a terse Chinese purpose and return note. It is compact, though the Chinese '获取网表' and 'returns: 网表数据' largely restate what the signature already implies, so a small amount of redundancy exists.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description should explain return format, default behavior when type is omitted, and valid ESYS_NetlistType values. None of that is present, so an agent would have to guess at the exact invocation details.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the official signature with the optional type?: ESYS_NetlistType parameter, which is useful beyond the generic args array, but it does not explain what values ESYS_NetlistType can take or how they affect the returned netlist.

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 '获取网表' (get netlist) and includes the API signature pcb_Net.getNetlist(...), making the verb and resource clear. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like eda_sch_netlist_get_netlist or eda_pcb_manufacture_data_get_netlist_file, but the pcb_Net prefix and tool name carry enough scope.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as eda_sch_netlist_get_netlist or eda_pcb_manufacture_data_get_netlist_file. No prerequisites, exclusions, or context are mentioned, so the agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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