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

The description discloses that the path is discarded, giving some insight into behavior. However, it does not specify the output format or any side effects, and there are no annotations 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 a single, concise sentence that clearly conveys the core action and a key detail (path discarded). It is appropriately sized and immediately understandable.

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 does not explain what the tool returns or how the parsed output is structured, which is important since there is no output schema. It also provides no broader context about Figma URL parsing, leaving the agent with incomplete information.

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?

The schema already provides descriptions for all 9 parameters, achieving 100% coverage. The tool description itself adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it rests at the baseline score.

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 specifically notes that the path is discarded. This directly distinguishes it from other URL-related tools like normalize-url or browser-url-ok.

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?

The description does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks explicit comparison or conditions for selection, leaving the agent to infer based on the name and minimal description.

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