resize_node

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure, but it only states 'Resize a node' without explaining traits like whether resizing maintains aspect ratio, what units are used, or how constraints (e.g., auto-layout) affect the operation. This lack of detail limits transparency.

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 concise at one sentence, but its minimalism may sacrifice clarity. It earns its place by being short, but it could be slightly more detailed (e.g., noting units or constraints) without becoming verbose.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity and no output schema, the description is partially complete but misses important context such as return value (e.g., updated node info), side effects (e.g., affecting children), and error conditions (e.g., invalid node ID). The description does not fully equip the agent to use the tool confidently.

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 input schema already describes all three parameters (nodeId, width, height) with 100% coverage. The description 'Resize a node' adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, achieving the baseline score for parameter semantics.

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 'Resize a node in Figma' clearly states the verb (resize) and resource (node), making the tool's purpose immediately obvious. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools that involve other operations like moving, cloning, or deleting nodes.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., set_layout_sizing, set_layout_mode). It does not mention prerequisites, such as whether the node must be selected or if certain constraints apply, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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