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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only reveals that the path is discarded, but omits error handling, required URL format, return value, or any side effects. This is minimal disclosure for a tool with no structured behavioral hints.

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 (one sentence), which is good, but it omits essential information. It is under-specified rather than appropriately concise, leaving the agent without necessary details.

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?

With no output schema, no annotations, and a terse description, the tool is inadequate for an agent to call correctly. The description doesn't clarify how to use the 9 parameters or what the tool returns, and the parameter set seems inconsistent with the stated purpose.

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 coverage is 100% so baseline is 3, but the description does not link any parameters to the Figma URL parsing behavior. The parameter set (city, feed, json, etc.) appears unrelated to Figma, and the description provides no clarification on which parameters are relevant or how they map to the parsing task.

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 (parse) and resource (Figma file URL) and a key behavior (path discarded). However, it doesn't explain what 'parse' returns or how it differs from sibling URL tools like normalize-url, beyond the Figma specificity.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Does not mention when not to use it or provide any exclusions or context for selection.

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