set_selection_colors

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly discloses the recursive behavior affecting all descendants, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not mention whether changes are reversible or if the tool modifies the original node in place.

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, no wasted words. Front-loaded with the main action and supported by a clarifying analogy. Perfectly concise.

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 covers the core behavior and typical use case. Without an output schema, return value details are omitted, but for a mutation tool this is acceptable. Could mention absence of side effects or return value.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage meaning all parameters are already documented. The description adds no extra semantic detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 explicitly states the tool recursively changes stroke and fill colors of a node and descendants, using a clear verb ('Recursively change') and resource ('stroke and fill colors'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like set_fill_color by specifying recursion and comparison to Figma's 'Selection colors' feature.

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?

Description implies usage for recoloring icon instances and notes similarity to a specific feature, providing useful context. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance or alternative tool suggestions, leaving room for ambiguity.

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