Part Information Review and Update
Thought for 2 mins 35 sec
I reviewed the current part metadata, schematic terminals, footprint pads, and the available official web references.
What I found
Project metadata
Table
| Field | Current value | Review |
|---|---|---|
| MPN | 3012TR | Looks correct |
| Manufacturer | Keystone | Looks correct |
| Description | Battery Retainer Coin, 16.0mm 1 Cell SMD (SMT) Tab | Matches distributor/official product wording closely |
| Mount | Surface Mount | Matches official product info |
| Package / Case | SMD | Broadly okay, but not very specific |
| Part Type | Integrated Circuits | Mismatch - this is a battery retainer/holder, not an IC |
| Designator Prefix | U | Likely not appropriate for a battery retainer |
From the official product pages, 3012TR is a 1-cell SMT holder/retainer for a 16 mm coin cell, made from phosphor bronze with tin-nickel plating. DigiKey also lists it as Battery Retainer Coin 16.0 mm SMD with PCB, Surface Mount mounting, and points to an official Keystone datasheet PDF. The Keystone product page also confirms 1 cell, 16 mm coin cell, SMT, phosphor bronze, and tin-nickel finish.
Datasheet URL
A datasheet URL is already set, so I did not change the project property.
Current property:
Datasheet URL = https://www.keyelco.com/product-pdf.cfm?p=4031
I also found another official Keystone-hosted datasheet link via DigiKey:
https://www.keyelco.com/userAssets/file/K75p11.pdf
So the current property is not missing, and it appears to already point at an official Keystone source.
Schematic symbol review
The schematic currently has 3 terminal components:
Observations:
- The symbol is internally consistent as a 3-terminal part
- All three terminals are present in the footprint too
- All Pin Type fields are still
Unspecified - There are no Pin Description properties
- No nets are defined, which is fine for a part project
I did not invent pin names or descriptions beyond what is already in the project, because pin numbers and terminal meanings should come directly from the datasheet, and the validation guidance is explicit that pin numbers must not be guessed and the datasheet must be the single source of truth .
Footprint review
The PCB footprint currently contains 3 pads, matching the schematic terminals:
That means:
- Symbol pin count and footprint pad count match
- Terminal naming between schematic and footprint matches
- I found no internal symbol-to-footprint mismatch
Table
| Item | Status |
|---|---|
Part Type = Integrated Circuits | Incorrect for this part |
Table
| Item | Status |
|---|---|
Designator Prefix = U | Likely poor fit for a battery holder/retainer |
Table
| Item | Status |
|---|---|
| Pin Type on all terminals | Missing / Unspecified |
| Pin Description on all terminals | Missing |
- MPN, manufacturer, description, and mount style are consistent with official/distributor product info
- The part is a 16 mm, 1-cell, SMT coin-cell retainer
- Symbol has 3 terminals
- Footprint has 3 pads
- Symbol and footprint are internally aligned
I could not fully cross-check the exact terminal numbering, polarity mapping, pad geometry, or pad descriptions against the datasheet drawing because the datasheet content itself was not machine-extracted successfully in this session. Since the validation rules require exact datasheet-derived pin data, I’m treating that as unresolved rather than guessing .
Recommended fixes
High priority
- Change
Part Typefrom Integrated Circuits to a battery-holder/retainer category - Add
Pin TypeandPin Descriptionfor:
- Replace
Package or Case Code = SMDwith a more specific package/mechanical identifier if the datasheet gives one - Change
Designator Prefixaway from U to something that matches your library convention for battery retainers
- No missing datasheet URL issue
- One confirmed metadata mismatch:
Part Type - No symbol/footprint count mismatch
- Terminal metadata is incomplete
- Exact pin-description and land-pattern verification is still pending datasheet extraction
If you want, I can do the next pass and fix the metadata now and then do a stricter terminal audit once you upload the PDF directly or provide a parseable datasheet link.
Fix metadata issues
Use battery holder category
Audit terminal mapping
Check footprint details
