Generate a production-ready JLCPCB SMT BOM CSV from a hardware netlist, grouping parts, aggregating designators, and classifying Basic vs. Extended components.
Generate production-ready JLCPCB SMT BOM CSV with part grouping, designator aggregation, and Basic/Extended classification.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| netlist | Yes | Hardware netlist dictionary or synthesis result. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false), so the bar is lower. The description usefully discloses the output content (grouped parts, aggregated designators, Basic/Extended classification), but says nothing about whether the CSV is returned inline or written to disk, which is the key behavioral unknown for an 'export' 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?
A single dense sentence with zero filler; the output format and its three transformations are front-loaded with nothing trailing.
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?
Wait – no output schema exists, so the description must carry the return-value burden, and it does name the artifact and its structure (grouped BOM CSV with classification).
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?
One parameter with 100% schema coverage, so the schema already documents the netlist. The description adds no input-side semantics: it does not state that the netlist must be validated, nor what netlist shape is acceptable (raw dictionary vs synthesis result).
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('Generate ... JLCPCB SMT BOM CSV') plus the three processing behaviors (part grouping, designator aggregation, Basic/Extended classification). An agent can distinguish it from calculate_bom_cost, generate_interactive_bom, and export_assembly_drawing_svg without opening any schema.
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 when-to-use guidance and no alternatives named. It never says whether the netlist must first pass validate_netlist, or when an agent should pick this over generate_interactive_bom or calculate_bom_cost.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.