easyeda-mcp-pro

Run design rule check

easyeda_drc_run

Idempotent

Run EasyEDA Pro's native PCB design rule check and refresh the visible DRC panel, returning severity counts; requires a focused PCB document, otherwise reports focus error.

Instructions

Run EasyEDA Pro's native PCB DRC and refresh its visible DRC panel. Requires a PCB document to be focused; otherwise returns an indeterminate not_available result with an actionable focus error. Returns coarse severity counts; per-violation detail stays in EasyEDA Pro.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`rules`	No
`projectId`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`error`	No
`passed`	Yes
`project_id`	Yes
`violations`	Yes
`error_count`	Yes
`not_available`	No
`warning_count`	Yes
`total_violations`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.19.3Oct 16, 2026
- removedOutput schema / properties / passed / anyOf
```
Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "boolean"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / passed / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "boolean",
+  "null"
+]
```

Changed5 schema fields changedv0.19.2Oct 2, 2026

changedInput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

changedOutput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

addedOutput schema / properties / error
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```

addedOutput schema / properties / passed / anyOf

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "boolean"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]

removedOutput schema / properties / passed / type
```
Removed value: -"boolean"
```

First observedv0.19.0Jul 4, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the mutation/idempotency profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that: the focus precondition, the shape of the failure mode (not_available + actionable focus error), and the deliberately coarse granularity of results with per-violation detail remaining in EasyEDA Pro.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and its side effect, followed by the precondition and the return granularity. No filler and nothing repeated from the schema or annotations.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description is not obliged to explain return values, yet it helpfully notes the coarse severity-count granularity. Precondition and failure behavior are covered; what is missing is any documentation of the 'rules' parameter, which the empty-coverage schema leaves entirely unexplained.

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% for two parameters (projectId, rules), so the schema itself explains nothing. The description never mentions either parameter — notably the optional 'rules' array, whose format and effect on the DRC run are entirely undocumented. This is a clear compensation gap.

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 — 'Run EasyEDA Pro's native PCB DRC' — plus the side effect of refreshing the visible DRC panel. The 'PCB' qualifier implicitly separates it from the schematic-side easyeda_erc_run, though it never explicitly distinguishes itself from PCB siblings like easyeda_pcb_constraint_check 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 Guidelines4/5

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

It clearly states the operating context: a PCB document must be focused, otherwise the call returns an indeterminate not_available result with an actionable focus error. That is genuinely useful 'when it works' guidance, but it names no alternative tool and gives no exclusions relative to the other PCB/rule-check siblings.

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

Deploy Server