figma_select

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose a real side effect — 'Switches to the page of the first node' — which tells the agent the viewport/page state changes. However, it omits whether this requires an active Figma session, what happens with nodes on different pages, or any return value.

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 short sentences, zero waste, with the core action front-loaded before the clarifying intent and the page-switch side effect.

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 single-parameter viewport/selection tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, intent, and the page-switch behavior adequately. Only the lack of any permission/session or multi-page caveat keeps it from being fully complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and one parameter, the description adds some meaning: 'node ids' identifies the array contents and 'the page of the first node' conveys that array ordering matters for the page switch. That is a genuine semantic hint beyond the bare schema, but it is thin for a required parameter.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Select and zoom to node ids in Figma') and adds the intent in parentheses. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like figma_inspect or figma_execute_plan, though it never explicitly contrasts with them.

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 parenthetical '(to show the user what was created or will change)' implies the usage context — surfacing results visually — but there is no explicit when-not guidance or named alternative (e.g., when to use figma_inspect instead). Usage is implied rather than directed.

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