figma_cleanup

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the most important trait: removal is gated behind approved=true and defaults to a non-destructive list. However it omits permissions needed, whether removal is reversible/permanent, and what the listing returns.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with an em-dash that separates the list behavior from the destructive variant and closes with the default. No wasted words, though it is dense and could be split for readability.

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 tool that can delete content with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the mode switch and defaults but leaves gaps around return contents, required permissions, and reversibility of deletion. Adequate but not complete for a destructive operation.

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?

Despite only 50% schema coverage, the description compensates by naming the filtering dimensions (session, run, node ids) and the default (this session) plus the approved=true trigger semantics. This adds real meaning beyond the two documented schema params, though nodeIds/approved still lack detailed semantics.

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 states a specific verb pair (list/remove) and the exact resource (nodes Layerwright created), scoped by session, run, or node ids. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly name or contrast itself with siblings like figma_execute_plan or figma_verify.

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 gives concrete context for when to reach for it ('leftovers from failed attempts') and states the default behavior (this session, list only) plus the condition that enables removal (approved=true). It lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance or named alternatives, but the usage condition is clear.

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