Generate an ObjectURL string from a Blob or File object for use in EasyEDA Pro. Enables referencing binary data as a URL.
sys_FileSystem.createObjectURL(blob: Blob | File) -> string 创建 ObjectURL remarks: 创建一个指向传入 Blob / File 对象的 ObjectURL
ADD since EDA v3.2.162 returns: ObjectURL 字符串
| 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 disclose behavior. It only states that it creates an ObjectURL pointing to the given blob, with no mention of memory management, lifetime, or the need to revoke. The sibling revoke tool implies a lifecycle, but this is not disclosed here.
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 structured with signature, Chinese description, remarks, version, and returns. However, the description and remarks are repetitive, and the version note is not essential for usage. It is compact but could be more efficient.
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?
The description provides the return type and basic purpose, but lacks details about URL lifetime, revocation requirements, or any constraints. Given the simple nature and existence of a revoke sibling, the description is adequate but not complete.
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's args property only says it is a JSON parameter array in official order, without item types. The tool description compensates by providing the full signature including the Blob | File parameter type. This adds meaningful semantic detail 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 tool creates an ObjectURL from a Blob or File, with a specific signature and purpose. It differentiates from the sibling eda_sys_file_system_revoke_object_url by its create action, making the purpose unambiguous.
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. It does not mention that the created URL should be revoked later, nor does it suggest any specific use cases. The usage context is entirely implied by the tool's name and signature.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.