Skip to main content
Glama
oaslananka

easyeda-mcp-pro

by oaslananka
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Get schematic net detail

easyeda_schematic_net_detail
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve connected pins and components for a specific schematic net. Use focused scope; page and all_pages fail on EasyEDA Pro 3.2.149.

Instructions

Get full details for a specific net in the current schematic context including connected pins and components. Explicit focused scope is supported; page/all_pages scopes fail closed on EasyEDA Pro 3.2.149.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
scopeNo
netNameYes
pageUuidNo
projectIdYesThe project/schematic ID

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
errorNo
nodesYes
net_nameYes
timed_outNo
error_codeNo
error_dataNo
node_countYes
project_idYes
read_scopeNo
not_availableNo
timeout_stageNo
timeout_componentNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed11 schema fields changedv0.19.2
    • 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 / pageUuid
      Added value: +{
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / scope
      Added value: +{
+  "enum": [
+    "focused",
+    "page",
+    "all_pages"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • 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 / error_code
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / error_data
      Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "focusedPageUuid": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "missingCapability": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "operation": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "pageUuid": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "requestedScope": {
+      "enum": [
+        "focused",
+        "page",
+        "all_pages"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / read_scope
      Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "focus_changed": {
+      "const": false,
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "focused_page_uuid": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "page_uuid": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "requested": {
+      "enum": [
+        "focused",
+        "page",
+        "all_pages"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "resolved": {
+      "enum": [
+        "focused",
+        "page",
+        "all_pages"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "source": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "requested",
+    "resolved",
+    "focus_changed",
+    "source"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / timed_out
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / timeout_component
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / timeout_stage
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.19.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / projectId / description
      Added value: +"The project/schematic ID"
  3. First observedv0.19.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With annotations already declaring readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, the description adds a meaningful behavioral constraint: page and all_pages scopes fail closed on EasyEDA Pro 3.2.149. This warns the agent of a non-obvious failure mode beyond the safety profile covered by annotations.

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 sentences with no waste: the first states purpose and returned content, the second front-loads the critical scope constraint. Every sentence earns its place.

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

Completeness3/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. However, with four parameters at 25% schema coverage, the description leaves netName and pageUuid semantics unclear and does not fully compensate for the low structured documentation.

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 only 25%, and the description compensates only partially by clarifying that the 'focused' scope value works while 'page' and 'all_pages' fail. It says nothing about netName, pageUuid, or what 'focused' actually means, leaving most parameters unexplained.

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 gives a specific verb ('Get full details') and resource ('specific net in the current schematic context') and lists the included content ('connected pins and components'). It is clearly distinct from sibling list tools like easyeda_schematic_nets, though it does not explicitly name any sibling as an alternative.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings such as easyeda_schematic_nets or easyeda_schematic_component_pins. It only states a scope constraint ('focused scope is supported; page/all_pages scopes fail closed'), which is a parameter behavior note rather than a use-case routing rule.

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