set_svg

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It states that the SVG is sanitized (scripts and external resources stripped) and has a 500KB limit. However, it does not mention whether the operation is undoable, how errors are handled (e.g., invalid SVG), or if it returns a node reference.

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 two sentences long with no redundant information. The first sentence immediately states the core purpose, and the second adds key behavioral details. Every word is justified.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, so the description needs to be more comprehensive. While it covers purpose and key constraints, it omits the return value (likely a node ID) and error conditions. For a tool that modifies document state, this leaves gaps.

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 schema already documents all parameters. The description adds only the sanitization detail beyond the schema. Since the schema provides adequate descriptions for each parameter (e.g., 'X position for the imported SVG'), the additional value is minimal, meeting the baseline of 3.

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 action: 'Import an SVG string as a vector node in Figma.' The verb 'import' and the resource 'SVG string' are specific, and the result is a 'vector node.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_svg' (export) and other creation tools.

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 provides constraints (sanitization, 500KB limit) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'create_rectangle' or 'export_node_as_image.' There is no guidance on prerequisites or exclusions, 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.