datasheet-lens

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

project_add_part

Add an orderable part to a user project and link its documents from the central store; project sync then copies those files into the project folder and returns the part with its documents.

Instructions

Add a part to the user project, with the documents that the store links to it. Then project_sync copies the documents into the project folder. Gives the part and its documents.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`mpn`	Yes	The concrete orderable MPN that the design (the BOM) uses, with its package, voltage or grade, for example TLV75533PDBVR. A base part MPN only for a short time, when the BOM has no concrete one yet: the result then gives a note.
`base`	No	The base part of the datasheet, for example TLV755P. The concrete part gets the documents of the base part.
`path`	No	A folder of the user project (default: the working folder of the server). The project file datasheet-lens.toml is in it or in a parent folder.
`role`	No	The role of the document: datasheet, manual, errata, appnote or other.	datasheet
`category`	No	The function of the part, for example ADC, LDO, MCU, flash, sensor. The layout of the project folder can use it as a folder name: use the values that the project has already (project_status).
`document`	No	A document to link first: its reference from project_status, list_documents or add_document. The link is in the central store (to the base part, if base is given), and other projects with this part get the document too.
`manufacturer`	No	The manufacturer. Use the spelling of list_parts (for example Texas Instruments, not TI when the store has it so): the layout of the project folder can use it as a folder name.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 29, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that this mutates project state and links documents in the central store, and that project_sync copies documents into the project folder. It does not cover duplicate handling, permission requirements, or failure modes.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the main action. The phrase 'the documents that the store links to it' is slightly repetitive but does not waste significant space.

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 and the input schema is fully documented, so return values and parameter meanings are covered. For a mutation tool with no annotations, the description should do more to explain side effects, duplicate behavior, or how it relates to project_sync sequencing; as written it is adequate but not complete.

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 100%, so the schema already fully documents the seven parameters. The description adds only a general note about linked documents and the project_sync follow-up, with no parameter-level guidance beyond what the schema provides.

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?

States a clear verb and resource: 'Add a part to the user project' plus linking documents from the store. It implicitly contrasts with project_update_part/project_remove_part by focusing on addition, but it does not explicitly name or differentiate those siblings.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies the tool is used when adding a part and its linked documents to a project, and notes that project_sync must run afterward. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use versus project_update_part, nor any when-not-to-use or prerequisites.

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