Get Figma image fills

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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only and open-world. The description adds that it returns download URLs for existing image fills, not a rendered node, which is a meaningful behavioral distinction. No contradictions found.

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?

Two sentences front-load the primary purpose and then state the key exclusion/alternative. No wasted words.

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 description fully explains what the tool returns (URLs) and how it differs from get_images. No output schema exists, but the operation is simple and annotations cover safety, so no critical missing detail.

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% for the single file parameter opportunely described as key or URL. The description doesn't add parameter-specific semantics beyond the schema, which meets the 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 and resource ('download URLs for images already uploaded as fills (imageRef)') and explicitly contrasts with get_images ('Not a node render'). This makes the tool's exact function unmistakable relative to its siblings.

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?

It clearly identifies what this tool is for (fills that are already uploaded) and gives an explicit alternative with a condition: 'use get_images to rasterize frames.' An agent knows when to pick this tool over the sibling and when not to.

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