eda_pcb_primitive_dimension_get

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 does add the return type Promise<IPCB_PrimitiveDimension | undefined> and the failure semantics ('undefined 表示获取失败'), which is genuinely useful. But it says nothing about whether invalid/missing primitives throw vs. return undefined beyond that one line, whether the operation is strictly read-only, or any window/auth prerequisites. The single disclosed behavior (undefined-on-failure) is helpful but thin for an unannotated tool.

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 extremely compact at three lines with no filler. The API signature is front-loaded, followed by the Chinese summary and return semantics. Every line earns its place. Minor deduction only because the return-type disclosure could have been integrated with usage guidance rather than standing as a trailing fragment.

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 output schema, the description must explain return values; it does state the return type and undefined failure case, which is a start. But it lacks guidance on how to construct the args array from a primitive ID, does not describe what fields IPCB_PrimitiveDimension contains, and gives no example. For a retrieval tool among a large homogeneous family (line_get, via_get, arc_get, region_get), the description is minimally adequate but leaves an agent to guess at 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 coverage is 100% and the schema documents both args (JSON array in official signature order) and windowId. The description adds value by showing the signature primitiveIds: string, which hints at what should populate the args array. However, the mapping between the flat primitiveIds string and the positional args array is left ambiguous, and the description does not clarify whether primitiveIds accepts a single ID or comma-separated multiple IDs. Since the schema's args description is generic ('JSON参数数组'), the description only partially fills the parameter-meaning gap.

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 clear verb+resource ('获取尺寸标注' – get dimension annotation) and provides the canonical API signature pcb_PrimitiveDimension.get(primitiveIds: string). The name and description together distinguish it from the create/delete/modify siblings (eda_pcb_primitive_dimension_create/delete/modify) by verb. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from eda_pcb_primitive_dimension_get_all or get_all_primitive_id, which an agent must infer from naming convention.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that eda_pcb_primitive_dimension_get_all exists for retrieving all dimensions, or get_all_primitive_id for enumerating dimension IDs, nor does it clarify the typical workflow (e.g., get IDs first, then call get per dimension). An agent selecting among the six dimension siblings gets zero routing help from the description.

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