scan_text_nodes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states 'scan all text nodes' without disclosing whether it is read-only, what it returns, or any side effects. The behavior is under-specified.

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 gets straight to the point. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource. However, it might be too terse given the lack of other context.

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 tool with one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what the tool returns, how the scan works, or any constraints.

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%, and the description adds no extra meaning to the 'nodeId' parameter beyond the schema's description. Baseline score of 3 applies.

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 tool scans all text nodes in a Figma node, distinguishing it from the sibling 'scan_nodes_by_types' which is broader. However, the meaning of 'scan' (whether it extracts text or just identifies nodes) is ambiguous.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'scan_nodes_by_types' or 'get_node_info'. No when-not-to-use or prerequisites are mentioned.

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