figma_search_assets

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

The description fully discloses the read-only nature and adds behavioral details beyond the readOnlyHint annotation: the instance prerequisite for library components, scanning behavior based on currentPageOnly, and the default asset types. No contradictions with annotations.

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 relatively long but well-structured, front-loading the primary purpose and then providing critical details about return types, prerequisites, and parameter usage. Every sentence adds value, though some minor redundancy could be trimmed.

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 lacking an output schema, the description thoroughly explains what is returned (three categories), the prerequisite for library components, and how to use the results. Given the tool's complexity with multiple asset types and parameters, the description provides complete contextual information.

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 description adds value beyond the input schema by clarifying the default for assetTypes, explaining the effect of currentPageOnly on component discovery, and noting the limit parameter. While schema descriptions are already clear, the description provides minimal extra context for a few parameters.

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 it searches for design system assets in the current Figma file, listing three specific return types (variables, local components, remote library components). It distinguishes from siblings like figma_search_components by covering multiple asset types and including workflow integration with figma_instantiate_component.

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 explains when to use the tool (to search assets including variables and remote library components) and provides important usage details such as the prerequisite of placing an instance for library components and the use of currentPageOnly. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternative tools for simpler searches.

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