easyeda-mcp-pro

Export Gerber files

easyeda_export_gerbers

Idempotent

Export PCB designs to Gerber files for fabrication directly from EasyEDA Pro projects, with options for drill format, layer exclusion, and production review.

Instructions

Export PCB design to Gerber files for PCB fabrication.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`filePath`	No
`ledPanel`	No
`projectId`	Yes
`drillFormat`	No
`excludeLayer`	No
`productionReview`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`error`	No
`exported`	Yes
`file_count`	No
`project_id`	Yes
`byte_length`	No
`artifact_path`	No
`not_available`	No
`production_review`	No
`blocked_by_production_review`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 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"

addedInput schema / properties / projectId / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```

changedOutput schema / $schema

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

Changed3 schema fields changedv0.19.1Jul 15, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / filePath
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```

addedOutput schema / properties / byte_length

Added value: +{
+  "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

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

First observedv0.19.0Jul 4, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, which covers the safety profile, but the description adds nothing behavioral. It does not say whether files are overwritten, what filePath defaults to, or what productionReview mode 'block' does — the only non-obvious behavior in this tool.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. Brevity is appropriate in form, though it is brevity achieved by omission rather than by tight editing of necessary content.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a 6-parameter, nested-object tool with no schema descriptions and 0% coverage, the description leaves the parameters entirely undocumented (the output schema handles return values). The core call — what filePath, drillFormat, excludeLayer, and productionReview do — is not addressed.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema coverage is 0% across 6 parameters, including an enum (drillFormat), an array (excludeLayer), and a nested object (productionReview with mode/boardData). The description explains none of them, so an agent gets no help on drill format, layer exclusion, or review mode semantics.

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: 'Export PCB design to Gerber files', with the end goal (PCB fabrication) named. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like easyeda_bom_export or easyeda_pcb_production_review, though it does not explicitly contrast with them.

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?

The description gives no when-to-use context, no prerequisites (e.g. must the PCB be synced from schematic first?), and no alternatives such as easyeda_pcb_production_review. The 'for PCB fabrication' phrase hints at intent but is not actionable guidance.

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

Deploy Server