easyeda-mcp-pro

Get active PCB design rules

easyeda_board_design_rules

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read the active EasyEDA DRC profile and global safe-spacing matrix so you can verify board clearances; net-class membership and per-net overrides are reported separately.

Instructions

Read the active EasyEDA DRC profile and its global safe-spacing matrix. Net-class membership and per-net overrides are reported separately and are not inferred.

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": {
      "projectId": "<projectId>"
    },
    "name": "easyeda_board_design_rules"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`projectId`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`error`	No
`project_id`	Yes
`data_source`	Yes
`not_available`	No
`has_clearance_rules`	No
`clearance_rule_count`	No
`minimum_clearance_mm`	No
`active_spacing_matrices`	Yes
`active_rule_configuration_name`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.19.8Nov 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond that by disclosing a scope limitation of the data model — that net-class membership and per-net overrides are not inferred and must be obtained elsewhere — which prevents an agent from misreading an absent value as an empty result.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two tight sentences with zero filler. The primary purpose is front-loaded and the scope caveat follows immediately, with no redundant restatement of the title.

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 read-only, single-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose and a key data-scope caveat. The remaining gap is routing: it never tells the agent when to pick this over easyeda_design_rules_lookup or the constraint-report siblings.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% — the single projectId parameter has no schema-level documentation. The description never mentions projectId, so it does not compensate for that gap; it is only inferable from the parameter name that it selects the project whose active DRC profile is read.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: reading the active EasyEDA DRC profile plus its global safe-spacing matrix. The second sentence narrows scope by declaring that net-class membership and per-net overrides are not part of this result. It does not, however, distinguish itself from close siblings like easyeda_design_rules_lookup, easyeda_pcb_constraint_report, or easyeda_rule_check_summary.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The note that net-class membership and per-net overrides are 'reported separately' implies another retrieval path exists for that data, but no sibling tool is named and no explicit when-to-use/when-not condition is given. The agent must infer the boundary itself.

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

Deploy Server