Figma file overview

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint true and openWorldHint false, and the description reinforces them with 'Everything is read-only and offline' and 'local' file handling. It does not contradict annotations and adds the concrete context of summarizing without external calls, though it does not go into failure modes.

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?

Four short sentences front-load the core purpose and summary contents, then the workflow. Every clause earns its place and there is no padding.

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?

With a single parameter, no output schema, and read-only annotations, the description supplies enough context: what file is opened, what the summary contains, and how to proceed afterward. Nothing important is missing for correct invocation.

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 one parameter (file) is already documented as a .fig/.figma path. The description's 'local .fig file' and 'summarise' framing adds mild context but not much beyond the schema.

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 names a specific verb ('Open... and summarise'), a concrete resource (local .fig file), and enumerates summary contents, so an agent immediately knows what fig_overview does and how it differs from the more granular sibling tools.

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?

It explicitly says 'START HERE' and gives a recommended workflow: overview, then fig_tree, then fig_node/fig_style, with fig_find as a jump shortcut. This tells the agent when to use this tool and which siblings to prefer next.

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