clone_node

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing side effects. It only states 'Clone an existing node' without mentioning default position, parent, selection, depth of clone, or return value. This is minimal behavioral disclosure for a mutation tool.

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 with no redundant wording. It is front-loaded and contains only the necessary information to convey the tool's purpose.

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?

Despite adequate schema coverage, the tool is a mutation that creates a new node and has no output schema. The description fails to mention what the tool returns (e.g., new node ID), default placement behavior, or parent context. This incomplete guidance could leave an agent uncertain about post-clone actions.

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 schema already provides descriptions for all three parameters (nodeId, x, y) with 100% coverage, so the description adds no additional parameter semantics. Baseline 3 applies as the structure does the heavy lifting.

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 uses the specific verb 'clone' with the resource 'node', clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like create_rectangle, delete_node, and move_node. It unambiguously states the core action of duplicating a node in Figma.

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 clone_node versus alternatives such as create_rectangle or create_component_instance. There is no mention of prerequisites, use cases, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage.

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