figma_status

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 specific state it reports (connection, file/page, selection, scan cache) plus a cost signal ('cheap'). It does not explicitly state that the call is side-effect free, but 'Check' and the read-only nature of the listed outputs make the safety profile reasonably clear.

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, fully front-loaded with the substantive content first and the actionable 'call first' cue last. Every clause earns its place by naming a distinct piece of state.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must indicate what comes back, and it enumerates the reported values well. It could say more about the response shape or failure modes (e.g., what happens when the plugin is disconnected), leaving a minor gap.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing to disambiguate; the schema is empty and consistent with the description. Baseline 4 applies for a parameterless tool.

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 ('Check') and enumerates the exact resources inspected: bridge connection, open file/page, current selection, and Design System scan cache. This is clearly distinguishable from siblings like figma_pages, figma_inspect, or figma_scan_design_system, which perform the actual scans or navigation.

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 directive 'Cheap; call first' gives an explicit ordering cue that tells the agent when to reach for this tool before others. It stops short of naming alternatives or when-not-to-call, but the sequencing guidance is concrete and actionable.

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