Focus a specific Figma slide in single-slide view by node ID to inspect or present one slide at a time.
Navigate to and focus a specific slide in single-slide view.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slideId | Yes | The node ID of the slide to focus |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.46.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a UI state change ('focus') but does not state whether this switches the view mode, whether it requires an existing open file, whether the focus is persistent, or what happens if the slide ID is invalid.
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?
It is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It could be slightly more informative but is appropriately sized for a simple navigation tool.
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 one-parameter navigation tool with no output schema, the description covers the core action but leaves out helpful context about side effects, prerequisites, or what the agent should expect after focusing. It is minimally viable rather than complete.
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 single parameter has 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already documents slideId. The description does not add any syntax, format, or constraints beyond what the schema provides, which is the expected baseline.
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 names a specific verb ('Navigate to and focus') and resource ('a specific slide'), and adds the scope 'single-slide view.' It is clear, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from close siblings like figma_get_focused_slide or figma_get_slide_grid.
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?
Usage is only implied: an agent can infer it should call this when it needs to focus a slide. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of alternatives such as figma_set_slides_view_mode or figma_get_slide_grid.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.