export_node_as_image

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention any side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or constraints like file size limits or node affinity. The agent has no insight into what happens during export beyond the basic action.

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 a single concise sentence, front-loading the core action. However, it could be slightly expanded with key behavioral details without becoming verbose. It structures information efficiently.

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?

Given the three parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not specify the output type (binary, URL, file path), constraints on scale or format, or error scenarios. The agent lacks crucial contextual information for reliable 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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., scale factor meaning, format implications). It simply restates the parameters implicitly.

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 clearly states the verb 'Export', the resource 'a node', and the output 'as an image from Figma'. It is specific and distinguishes itself from siblings as the only export tool, leaving no ambiguity about its core function.

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. While there are no direct sibling export tools, it does not mention any prerequisites, context for use, or situations where this tool might be inappropriate, leaving the agent without enough decision support.

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