Reviewed the MCP4461-103E/ST part against the official Microchip MCP444X/446X datasheet.
Key specs confirmed
MPN: MCP4461-103E/ST
Manufacturer: Microchip
Function: Quad nonvolatile 8-bit I²C digital potentiometer
Resistance: 10 kΩ, code 103
Resolution: 257 taps
Package: 20-TSSOP, package code ST
Supply: 2.7 V to 5.5 V specified, with limited serial-interface operation down to 1.8 V
Temperature: -40°C to +125°C
I²C: 100 kHz, 400 kHz, 3.4 MHz
Analog terminal range: VSS to VDD
Max current through A/W/B terminals: ±2.5 mA
Datasheet
Existing Datasheet URL is already set, so I did not overwrite it.
Official Microchip datasheet found: http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/devicedoc/22265a.pdf
Symbol/pinout check
The symbol has 20 terminals, and every pin number/name matches the MCP4461 20-pin TSSOP datasheet pinout: P3A, P3W, P3B, HVC/A0, SCL, SDA, VSS, P1B, P1W, P1A, P0A, P0W, P0B, ~WP, ~RESET, A1, VDD, P2B, P2W, P2A.
Footprint check
Footprint asset: SOP65P640X120-20N.kicad_mod
Pad count: 20
Pitch: 0.65 mm
Body/courtyard geometry is consistent with a 20-lead TSSOP footprint.
Footprint-to-symbol pad names/pin order match the datasheet.
Mismatches / issues flagged
Part Type is set to “Resistors”; this should ideally be Integrated Circuit or Digital Potentiometer, since this is an I²C-controlled IC, not a simple passive resistor.
Resistance property is blank even though the MPN 103 specifies 10 kΩ.
Symbol terminals all have Pin Type: Unspecified; datasheet-derived pin types should be set for better ERC: power pins, I²C I/O/input pins, analog potentiometer terminals, reset/write-protect/address inputs.
Pin descriptions are not populated on the terminal properties; names are correct, but richer descriptions from the datasheet are missing.
Component review checks returned no matching active results, so there were no tool-reported part review violations to list.
Looking at the datasheet of this component, can you group together pins by their functions?
for example for Power, 3v3, gnd_1 gnd_2 etc
NOTE: If you group them, can you not add the same pin if you already added them in a group? You should know which pin function is common for its function.
I applied the grouping, then saw the platform suggested more standard group labels; I’m normalizing them now so the metadata is cleaner and still one group per pin.