figma_batch_update_variables

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose two critical operational facts: the Desktop Bridge plugin requirement and that IDs must be sourced beforehand. It stops short of stating atomicity or per-item failure behavior for a batch mutation, which is the kind of context an agent would want before sending 100 updates.

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?

Four short sentences, each front-loaded with a distinct fact: purpose, alternative, prerequisite, environment requirement. Nothing repeats the schema or the name.

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?

For a single-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, prerequisites, and environment. The remaining gap is outcome behavior (partial failures, confirmation of applied updates), which matters at the 100-item batch scale but is a minor omission.

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% and the nested item descriptions already explain value formats per variable type and the ID formats, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds the provenance of the IDs but does not mention the 1-100 array bound that the schema enforces, so baseline 3 applies.

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 (update), resource (variable values), and scope (multiple in one operation), which immediately distinguishes it from the singular figma_update_variable and from figma_batch_create_variables. The title/sibling set leaves no ambiguity about what this does.

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?

Explicitly names the alternative it replaces ('Use instead of calling figma_update_variable repeatedly') with the reason (bulk speed), and gives a prerequisite step ('Get variable/mode IDs from figma_get_variables first'). That is a complete when-to-use and how-to-prepare instruction.

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