Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
circuit-agent

circuit-agent

by mo9652962-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

autoroute_pcb

Read-onlyIdempotent

Execute automated native PCB layout and multi-layer track routing on circuit specifications. Generates standard Specctra SES (Session) routing data and comprehensive physical metrics (completion rate, total track length, via count, layer…

Instructions

Execute automated native PCB layout and multi-layer track routing on circuit specifications. Generates standard Specctra SES (Session) routing data and comprehensive physical metrics (completion rate, total track length, via count, layer utilization) with zero JVM dependencies.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "modules": "<modules>",
      "netlist": "<netlist>"
    },
    "name": "autoroute_pcb"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
engineNoAutorouting engine track. 'exact' (default) is orthogonal and DRC-verified; 'grid' is 8-connected and can leave diagonal shorts; 'room' uses continuous expansion rooms (may leave nets unrouted on dense boards).exact
modulesYesComponent modules dict (from synthesize_circuit output).
netlistYesNetlist dict with 'connections' (from synthesize_circuit output).
clearance_mmNoDefault routing clearance in mm (default: 0.100 / 4mil).
board_width_mmNoPCB width in mm (default: 70.0).
trace_width_mmNoDefault routing trace width in mm (default: 0.150 / 6mil).
board_height_mmNoPCB height in mm (default: 50.0).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.16.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds useful context by naming the generated artifacts and the 'zero JVM dependencies' property, but it does not describe failure behavior, whether any files are written, or how the engine choice affects outcomes beyond what the schema already says.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two front-loaded sentences cover the action and the outputs with little waste. The 'zero JVM dependencies' clause is slightly promotional rather than operational, which keeps it from a 5.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a compute-heavy tool with no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the returned outputs (SES data, completion rate, track length, via count, layer utilization). The rich schema covers all parameters, so the main remaining gap is workflow context about prerequisites and when this tool should be selected over related siblings.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% and includes detailed defaults and engine tradeoffs, so parameter meaning is already fully documented. The description adds no parameter-specific guidance beyond the schema, which is the correct baseline when the schema carries that burden.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Execute automated native PCB layout and multi-layer track routing on circuit specifications'. It also names the output artifacts (Specctra SES data, physical metrics), which helps separate it from sibling export/analysis tools. It stops short of explicitly naming which sibling to use instead, so it doesn't reach a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-tool guidance. The reader can infer it is the autorouting step, but the description never says to run it after validate_netlist/synthesize_circuit or how it relates to run_pcb_drc or export_specctra_dsn.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools