figma_get_component

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description confirms read behavior. Adds context with 'No REST API' indicating it's a local plugin call, but does not detail error handling or edge cases.

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, front-loaded with purpose, no unnecessary words. Efficient and clear.

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 read-only annotations and simple purpose, the description covers targeting and basic usage. Lacks return format details but is complete enough for a straightforward tool.

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 67% (2 of 3 parameters described). Description adds context that figmaUrl and fileKey are for targeting, but nodeId (required) lacks schema description and relies on the description's implication.

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 verb (Get), resource (component metadata by node ID), and scope (from open Figma file). Distinguishes from siblings by noting 'No REST API' and targeting nuances.

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 context for when to use (get metadata by node ID) and targeting options (fileKey/figmaUrl), but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or comparison with similar siblings like figma_get_component_for_development or figma_get_component_image.

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