Get schematic sheet info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, covering safety. The description adds context about returning metadata and its purpose, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide. No contradictions.

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?

The description is a single sentence, 14 words, with no superfluous content. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it efficient for the agent to parse.

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?

Given the existence of an output schema, the description reasonably lists returned metadata fields. However, it does not explain the parameter or the 'active sheet' context, and with 0% schema coverage on the parameter, the description is incomplete for effective use.

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?

The schema has one parameter (projectId) with 0% description coverage and it is not required. The description fails to mention or explain the parameter, leaving the agent unsure of its role or whether it is optional (the description says 'active' without clarifying).

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 clearly states the tool returns read-only active schematic sheet metadata, listing specific items (page size, frame, origin, grid hints). It distinguishes from sibling tools that deal with components or nets, though it does not explicitly contrast them.

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?

The description hints at usage for 'safer component placement' but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like easyeda_schematic_components. No when-not-to-use or alternative names are mentioned.

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