easyeda_schematic_netsList all nets in a schematic with their node connections by providing the project ID.
List all nets in the schematic with their node connections.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| projectId | Yes | The project/schematic ID |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| nets | Yes | ||
| error | No | ||
| total | Yes | ||
| project_id | Yes | ||
| not_available | No | ||
| read_consistency | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.19.1Input schema / properties / projectId / descriptionAdded value: +"The project/schematic ID"Output schema / properties / errorAdded value: +{
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / nets / items / properties / canonical_net_nameAdded value: +{
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / nets / items / properties / imported_aliasAdded value: +{
+ "type": "boolean"
+}Output schema / properties / nets / items / properties / net_kindAdded value: +{
+ "enum": [
+ "signal",
+ "power",
+ "ground",
+ "power-flag",
+ "unnamed"
+ ],
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / nets / items / properties / normalization_rulesAdded value: +{
+ "items": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+}Output schema / properties / nets / items / properties / raw_net_nameAdded value: +{
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / nets / items / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "net_name",
- "node_count",
- "nodes"
-]New value: +[
+ "net_name",
+ "raw_net_name",
+ "canonical_net_name",
+ "net_kind",
+ "normalization_rules",
+ "imported_alias",
+ "node_count",
+ "nodes"
+]Output schema / properties / read_consistencyAdded value: +{
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "attempts": {
+ "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
+ "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ "stable": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "stable",
+ "attempts"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}v0.19.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so safety is covered. The description adds value by specifying that node connections are included in the output, beyond the parameter schema.
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?
Single sentence of 8 words, perfectly front-loaded with no wasted text. Every word earns its place.
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?
Despite the simplicity, the description covers the tool's purpose completely. The presence of an output schema means return values need not be described. For one-parameter list tool, it is fully adequate.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100% for the single parameter (projectId described as 'The project/schematic ID'). The description does not add any additional meaning to the parameter, so baseline score applies.
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?
The description 'List all nets in the schematic with their node connections' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like easyeda_schematic_net_detail (which focuses on a single net) and easyeda_schematic_validate_netlist (validation).
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 explicit guidance on when or when not to use this tool vs alternatives. While implied as the general listing function, the description lacks criteria for selection over related tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.