set_auto_layout

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

No annotations provided, so the description bears full burden. It only states 'Configure', without disclosing effects like whether existing properties are overridden, if the node must already have auto layout enabled, or any permissions needed. The description lacks behavioral detail beyond the action.

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?

A single concise sentence that front-loads the purpose. No redundant or unnecessary words; every part contributes to 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?

With 11 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It omits return values, error conditions, preconditions (e.g., does the node need to be a frame?), and behavioral context. A more thorough description is needed for such a complex 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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; parameters are already well-described in the schema (e.g., 'paddingTop', 'layoutMode'). No relational or conditional semantics are explained.

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 configures auto layout properties for a Figma node. It specifies the verb 'Configure' and resource 'auto layout properties', distinguishing it from generic node property tools like set_node_properties. However, it could be more precise about the scope (e.g., 'for a given node').

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For instance, it does not clarify that this tool is specifically for auto layout settings, while other tools like set_node_properties might be used for general properties. There is no mention of prerequisites or when not to use it.

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