figma_export_selection_json

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It correctly indicates a read-only operation ('Export'), but it does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the tool modifies the file, permissions required, rate limits, or what happens with large selections. The list of included properties adds some context but falls short of comprehensive 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?

The description is a single concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose and output. It front-loads the key action and resource, then efficiently lists the contained data in parentheses. No extraneous 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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (4 optional parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is adequate but not thorough. It does not explain the return format structure, error conditions, or the definition of 'current selection'. For a tool with no output schema, some additional context on what the JSON looks like would improve completeness.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for all four parameters. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides; it lists the types of data included (e.g., geometry, layout) which indirectly relates to parameters like includeLayout, but does not explicitly connect them. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Export', the resource 'current selection', and the output format 'structured JSON', followed by a parenthetical list of included properties (geometry, layout, typography, etc.). This specificity distinguishes it from siblings like figma_get_selection, which likely returns raw selection data rather than a structured JSON export.

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 when you need to export structured JSON of the selection, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., figma_get_selection or figma_get_node_tree), nor does it specify prerequisites or exclusions.

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