Post a Figma comment

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

The annotations already indicate this is a mutating operation. The description adds the required file_comments:write scope and explicitly frames the action as an additive POST operation, which supplements the annotation without contradicting it.

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 loaded with the action, endpoint, and scope. It is concise, front-loaded, and contains no 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?

For a tool with 8 parameters and no output schema, the description is too thin. It does not explain return behavior, the relationship between x/y and new pins, or how offset_x/offset_y interact with node_id.

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 description repeats the comment_id reply concept already present in the schema but adds no meaning for other parameters. Notably, message, offset_x, and offset_y are not idocumented in the schema and the description does not help compensate for this gap.

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 identifies the tool as adding a comment or reply and names the HTTP endpoint and required scope. It is easy to distinguish from siblings like get_comments, delete_comment, or post_comment_reaction.

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 explicitly covers the main usage cases: posting a new comment or replying to a root comment via comment_id. However, it does not explicitly mention exclusions or point to alternative tools for related actions.

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