lookup_figma_node

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

No annotations provided. Description mentions input formats and output types (Aurum components, Code Connect mappings, icons) but lacks details on result cardinality, error handling, pagination, or side effects. Incomplete behavioral disclosure.

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 efficient sentences, front-loaded with key term 'Reverse-lookup', includes example IDs. No unnecessary words.

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?

No output schema; description vaguely says 'return matching...' without specifying format (list vs. single) or handling of missing nodes. Lacks completeness for a simple lookup 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 coverage is 100% with clear parameter description. Tool description adds example formats but does not significantly enhance beyond schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 tool's purpose: reverse-lookup from Figma node ID or URL to code artifacts. It specifies input formats and output types, distinguishing it from siblings like search or get_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 implies usage for designer workflow ('I'm looking at this Figma node, what code is it?') but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools (e.g., search) for similar tasks.

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