list_comments

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the auth requirement (FIGMA_TOKEN) and that it hits the REST API rather than a plugin bridge, which is real context, but says nothing about pagination, ordering, or result shape.

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?

One tight sentence with the verb front-loaded and the auth note tucked into a parenthetical; nothing is wasted. It is terse to the point of under-specification, but not padded.

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 annotations and no output schema mean the description must explain the operation's contract, and it does not: the return format (comment ids, authors, timestamps) and pagination behavior are absent, and the lone required parameter is undocumented.

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 single parameter fileKey has 0% schema description coverage and the description adds no meaning at all about what a file key is or where to obtain it. With one undocumented parameter, the description is expected to compensate and does not.

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('comments on a Figma file') and even names the transport (REST API), so an agent knows exactly what the tool returns. It does not, however, differentiate itself from the comment-family siblings post_comment and delete_comment, which a 5 would require.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of the sibling post_comment/delete_comment alternatives, and no stated preconditions beyond the token. The agent is left to infer that 'list' is the read path of the comment family.

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