Auto-extract netlist and run semantic ERC

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable context that the tool infers electrical types from naming conventions and treats findings as a first-pass signal, which is beyond what annotations provide.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and caveat without unnecessary words.

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 a single parameter and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential behavioral aspects and usage guidance, though it could slightly benefit from mentioning the output structure (but output schema likely covers that).

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description does not explain the sole 'projectId' parameter, leaving its meaning implicit. It relies on the tool name and context, which is insufficient for a low-coverage scenario.

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 extracts nets/devices/pins from the live schematic and runs semantic ERC, and distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'semantic_erc_validate' by noting it is a first-pass signal.

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 explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool (for quick auto-extraction and ERC) and when not to use it (not a substitute for semantic_erc_validate), providing clear guidance.

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