Draw the single-line or multi-line diagram

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful operation context beyond that: the uniwire[pdf] extra requirement, the hosted-server pdf_url behavior, and that certain color modes add a legend.

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 purpose is front-loaded, but the body is a dense multi-clause run-on with embedded line breaks and a parenthetical example ('e.g. a wire-marking view') that adds little. Several clauses duplicate schema content rather than adding new information.

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?

An output schema exists, yet the description still usefully clarifies the return shape differences (SVG text vs written PDF vs base64 vs pdf_url), which is the main ambiguity for an 8-parameter render call. Combined with the annotations, an agent has what it needs to invoke correctly.

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%, so every parameter (kind, view, format, color, sheet, conductor_colors, path, document) is already documented in the schema. The description largely restates those definitions verbatim, adding only the legend note and the 'numbered from 1' sheet detail, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb ('Draw') and resource ('the electrical diagram', with the domain terms schéma unifilaire/multifilaire), and immediately scopes it to the two variants via 'kind'. An agent can distinguish this rendering tool from siblings like viewer_link, wiring, or bom without opening the schema.

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?

Gives clear conditional guidance for invocation: 'pdf' writes to 'path' if given, else returns base64, and on the hosted server returns pdf_url instead; 'svg' returns SVG text of every sheet or of 'sheet'. It never explicitly names an alternative sibling (e.g. viewer_link for interactive viewing), so it stops short of full when/when-not routing.

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