Get local variables

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

Annotations already cover read-only nature. The description adds meaningful behavior: it is a raw REST call (no transformation/fallback) and includes consumed remote variables, which could surprise users expecting only local. No annotation contradiction.

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?

One compact, information-dense sentence. Endpoint, auth, scope, and alternative tool all included without filler.

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?

Single well-documented parameter; purpose, access requirements, and differentiation are all covered. Missing only explicit response shape, though 'raw REST' implies standard Figma API JSON, so the gap is minor.

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 description already fully explains the file parameter (Figma file key or URL, 100% coverage). The description's endpoint path reinforces the parameter's role but adds no new semantic detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 the specific HTTP verb (GET), resource path (/files/{key}/variables/local), and scope (local + consumed remote). Distinct from siblings, and explicitly contrasts with get_variable_defs.

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?

Names the alternative tool (get_variable_defs) and the condition favoring it (codegen shape, automatic fallback). Also mentions access requirements (Enterprise, file_variables:read). Does not explicitly state 'use this when you want raw REST,' but that is strongly implied.

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