set_stroke_color

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It adds some behavioral information by stating defaults (opacity=1, weight=1) for optional parameters. However, it does not disclose whether the operation is destructive, if any permissions are needed, or what side effects occur (e.g., if the node already has a stroke).

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 sentence with no extraneous information. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and adds defaults parenthetically. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a simple mutation tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and defaults. It does not mention error cases, return values, or prerequisites, but given the tool's simplicity and the schema's completeness, it is mostly adequate.

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 input schema already describes all parameters. The description adds marginal value by noting default values for 'a' and 'strokeWeight', which is not in the schema. This slightly enhances understanding but does not significantly increase meaning beyond the schema.

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 sets the stroke color of a node in Figma, specifying the verb 'Set' and the resource 'stroke color'. It also provides default values for opacity and weight. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from similar sibling tools like set_fill_color, but the context of 'stroke' makes it clear enough.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as set_fill_color or other node-modifying tools. The description merely states the action and defaults, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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