Post Figma Comment

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

Annotations indicate it is a non-destructive write operation (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false). The description adds the auth requirement (FIGMA_TOKEN) which is not in annotations, providing useful behavioral context. No contradictions.

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?

Two succinct sentences cover the main action and key additional info. No wasted words, front-loaded with the primary purpose.

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 comment-posting tool with no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It could benefit from brief guidance on when to use it among many sibling tools, but not essential for basic usage.

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 marginal value by mentioning the optional node anchoring, but does not provide deeper semantics beyond what the schema offers.

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 ('Post a comment') and the resource ('Figma file'), with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_figma_comments' by being a write operation.

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 mentions an optional feature (anchoring to a node) and a prerequisite (FIGMA_TOKEN), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings like 'get_figma_comments' or other comment-related tools. Usage context is implied but not explicit.

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