Retrieve all bus primitive IDs from the schematic editor to identify buses for further manipulation. Use this to get an array of bus IDs for the active or specified EDA window.
sch_PrimitiveBus.getAllPrimitiveId() -> Promise<Array> 获取所有总线的图元 ID returns: 总线的图元 ID 数组
| 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?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It only states the return type (Promise<Array<string>>) and that it fetches IDs, but does not disclose whether it is read-only, has side effects, performance implications, or any other behavioral traits. Minimal value beyond the function signature.
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, with no fluff. It front-loads the core purpose and return type. However, it is so brief that it omits necessary context, which slightly reduces effectiveness, but for conciseness alone it is appropriate.
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 absence of annotations and output schema, the description should provide more context about usage and parameters. It does not explain the wrapper parameters (args, windowId), nor does it offer any examples or clarification on when to use this over similar getters. Incomplete for an agent to invoke correctly without additional inference.
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?
The schema covers both parameters (args and windowId) with generic descriptions, but the tool description adds no specific meaning. It does not clarify that the original function takes no arguments (so args should be empty) or how windowId affects the result. Since the description does not compensate for the generic nature of the schema parameters, an agent may not know how to correctly pass arguments.
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 it gets all bus primitive IDs ('获取所有总线的图元 ID') and the return type. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like eda_sch_primitive_bus_get_all (which returns full objects) or eda_sch_primitive_bus_get (specific bus). The purpose is clear but not explicitly contrasted with alternatives.
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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The name implies it's for retrieving IDs, but the description does not state conditions like 'use this when you only need IDs, not full objects' or 'prefer this over get_all for performance'. No exclusions or context provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.