export_node_as_image

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

With no annotations and only a one-sentence description, the agent must infer behavior. The description implies read-only export but does not confirm idempotency, side effects, or permission requirements. The agent lacks explicit information about whether this operation modifies the node or file.

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 concise—one sentence with no unnecessary words. However, it may be too brief for a tool with optional parameters and no annotations. Still, there is no wasted content, and it is front-loaded with the key action.

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?

The description omits important context: return type (e.g., image URL, base64, or download link), default values for format and scale, and any constraints on node types (e.g., only frame nodes). Given the complexity of a three-parameter tool with no output schema, this lack of completeness hinders effective use.

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 covers all three parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the description adds no extra meaning. However, the schema descriptions themselves are minimal (e.g., 'Export scale' lacks context about units). The description could have clarified constraints like default format or scale range but did 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?

The description 'Export a node as an image from Figma' clearly states the action (export) and resource (node), distinguishing it from sibling tools like clone_node or flatten_node. The verb is specific and the resource is well-defined.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or when-not-to-use conditions. For example, it doesn't mention that exporting requires the node to be on the current page or that certain format limitations exist.

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