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

The description mentions that the path is discarded, giving a small behavioral hint. However, it does not disclose side effects, output format, or error behavior, and no annotations are present to supplement this.

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 very concise, but it omits critical information such as how the other parameters relate to the task and what the output is. The brevity is acceptable, but it sacrifices necessary detail.

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?

The description covers only the basic action and one behavior (path discarded). It lacks information about expected output, parameter relationships, and edge cases. The 9 parameters are not explained in the context of the tool, leaving the tool incomplete for an agent.

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?

While each parameter in the schema has a description, the parameters (ref, city, feed, host, json, path, zone, query) appear unrelated to Figma URL parsing. The descriptions themselves are clear but misleading in the context of this tool's purpose, making the semantics confusing.

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 parses a Figma file URL and indicates that the path is discarded. This gives a specific verb and object, though the deeper purpose (e.g., validation, extraction) is not elaborated.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus any alternative. The description lacks context for choosing this over other tools in the sibling list.

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