Retrieves a slide's current transition settings—style, duration, easing curve, and timing—by slide ID so you can inspect or verify how it animates.
Get the current transition settings for a slide (style, duration, easing curve, timing).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slideId | Yes | The node ID of the slide |
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 must carry the behavioral burden. It signals a non-destructive read by saying 'Get the current transition settings' and lists the returned fields, but it does not address permissions, error behavior if the slide lacks transitions, or any other operational context.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence with zero waste. It communicates the operation and the returned fields immediately.
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 simple one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description is largely complete: it names the operation and enumerates what the response contains. The only minor gap is the lack of explicit usage guidance relative to the setter sibling.
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 the single slideId parameter is already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides, which is the expected baseline when schema coverage is complete.
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 and resource — 'Get the current transition settings for a slide' — and enumerates the returned values (style, duration, easing curve, timing). It is clearly distinct from figma_set_slide_transition, but does not explicitly name that sibling as the alternative.
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 read-only intent is implied by 'Get the current transition settings', which makes the usage context clear enough. However, it gives no explicit guidance about when to use this versus figma_set_slide_transition or other slide-inspection tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.