set_node_properties

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It accurately states that the tool modifies node properties and that omitted properties are unchanged. However, it does not discuss side effects, permissions, or error conditions. The behavior is straightforward, so a 3 is appropriate.

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 with no wasted words. The first sentence states purpose, the second adds a crucial usage detail. Information is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.

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 simple mutation tool with 4 parameters (all documented in schema) and no output schema, the description provides essential context. It explains partial update behavior. Missing output format, but that is acceptable given no output schema requirement. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to use correctly.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so schema descriptions already define each parameter. The tool description adds a meta-guideline ('only provided properties are changed') but does not elaborate on individual parameter meanings beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is correct.

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 action ('Set') and the specific resources (visibility, lock state, opacity) of a node in Figma. It differentiates from sibling tools like set_fill_color or resize_node by focusing on these three property types. The phrase 'only provided properties are changed' adds precision.

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 clear usage guidance: 'Only provided properties are changed; omitted properties remain unchanged.' This informs the agent that partial updates are safe and supported. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or specify when not to use this tool, though the context of siblings implies it is for these specific properties.

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