figma_enumerate_library_components

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. Description adds that it is 'LIVE', 'always fresh', and 'zero local cache dependency', providing useful behavioral context beyond the annotations. However, it does not discuss performance, error scenarios, or rate limits.

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 paragraph but well-structured: action statement, prerequisite, return format, parameter tips, and usage scenario. It is concise with no superfluous information, though could benefit from bullet points for clarity.

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?

Given no output schema, the description adequately describes return items and fields. It covers prerequisites and multi-library usage. Absence of pagination or limit info is acceptable for a live enumeration tool. Overall, it provides sufficient context for agent invocation.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the parameter matching behavior and references figma_list_connected_files for context, but does not add significant new information beyond the schema descriptions.

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?

Clearly states it enumerates all published components and component sets from a library Figma file. Specifies return format and distinguishes between component and component set kinds. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'figma_enumerate_published_components', leaving some ambiguity.

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?

Provides explicit prerequisite: library file must be open in FMCP plugin, and references figma_list_connected_files for setup. Offers guidance on using libraryName vs libraryFileKey parameters and multi-library usage. Does not specify when NOT to use this tool or mention alternatives, but covers key usage context well.

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