easyeda-mcp-pro

Plan safe schematic drawing region

easyeda_schematic_plan_safe_region

Read-onlyIdempotent

Calculates a safe schematic placement region based on requested content size and margin, returning anchor and bounds while avoiding title-block overlaps.

Instructions

Compute a safe schematic drawing region before placing components. Uses live sheet info when available, assumes EasyEDA bottom-left coordinates, reserves the default lower-right title-block keep-out, and returns an anchor/bounds plan that avoids title-block overlap.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`margin`	No
`projectId`	No
`contentWidth`	Yes	Estimated width of the planned circuit block in EasyEDA coordinates
`contentHeight`	Yes	Estimated height of the planned circuit block in EasyEDA coordinates
`preferredRegion`	No		upper-left
`titleBlockKeepout`	No	Optional explicit title-block keep-out rectangle when the sheet template is known

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`error`	No
`sheet`	Yes
`anchor`	Yes
`bounds`	Yes
`issues`	Yes
`blocked`	Yes
`keepouts`	Yes
`warnings`	Yes
`project_id`	No
`not_available`	No
`usable_bounds`	Yes
`preferred_region`	Yes
`requested_bounds`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 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"

Addedv0.19.1Jul 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnly and idempotent behavior, so the bar is lower, and the description still adds real context: live sheet info is used 'when available' (fallback behavior), coordinates follow EasyEDA bottom-left convention, and a default title-block keep-out is reserved. It does not describe output shape, but the output schema exists to carry that.

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 that leads with the action, then stacks constraints. Efficient and free of filler, though the string of clauses makes it dense.

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 planning tool with an output schema, the return plan does not need describing, and the coordinate assumptions plus keep-out defaults are the key operational facts. Minor gaps remain around the optional margin and preferredRegion semantics but nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 50%, so the description should compensate but only partly does. It clarifies the title-block keep-out default and the coordinate convention, yet says nothing about 'margin', 'projectId', or 'preferredRegion', leaving half the parameters undocumented beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Compute a safe schematic drawing region before placing components.' An agent can distinguish this planning tool from siblings like easyeda_schematic_place_component and easyeda_schematic_check_collisions without opening any schema.

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?

Phrases the timing explicitly ('before placing components'), which gives clear context for when to invoke it. It stops short of naming an alternative sibling or stating exclusions, so it does not reach the top tier.

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

Deploy Server