get_selectionRetrieve the IDs of currently selected nodes in your Figma design to enable targeted edits or updates.
Get currently selected node IDs
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "get_selection"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states the primary operation (read-only retrieval of selected node IDs) but does not specify return format, empty selection behavior, or potential errors. It is adequate for a simple getter but lacks edge-case detail.
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 directly states the tool's purpose. It contains no filler or redundant information, making it efficiently structured and front-loaded.
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 zero-parameter getter with no output schema, the description provides essential information about the return type (node IDs). It is fairly complete, though it could additionally clarify the format (e.g., array) or empty-selection behavior, but these are minor gaps given the tool's simplicity.
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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema provides complete coverage. The description adds semantic context by indicating that the output is tied to the 'currently selected' nodes, which is relevant to how the tool operates, satisfying the baseline for no-parameter tools.
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 'Get currently selected node IDs' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly identifying the tool's function. It distinguishes itself from siblings like set_selection and get_node_properties by specifying it retrieves the current selection's node identifiers.
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 explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the description implies it is for retrieving the current selection, it does not mention when one might prefer this over set_selection or get_node_properties, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.