extract-color-vars

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states extraction and output to a file but omits key behavioral traits: whether this is a read-only operation, authentication requirements, side effects (e.g., file creation), or what happens if the file already exists. The description is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's impact.

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 a single sentence, which is concise. However, it lacks structure and fails to front-load critical information. While not verbose, the brevity sacrifices completeness and clarity.

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?

The tool has 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description does not explain the output format, how the output file path is determined, or any error conditions. Given the low schema/annotation richness, the description is incomplete for safe and effective use.

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% (both fileKey and nodeId are described in schema). However, the description mentions outputting to a user-specified file, yet no parameter for the output path exists in the schema. This inconsistency confuses parameter semantics and reduces the value added by the description beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool extracts color variables from a Figma DSL file and outputs them to a user-specified file. It distinguishes from sibling tools like extract-svg-assets or similarity-figma by focusing on color variables. However, the description is in Chinese, which may impact clarity for non-Chinese-speaking agents.

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. It does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or context where other tools might be preferred. Sibling tools exist (e.g., extract-svg-assets), but no differentiation is provided.

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