figma_create_slide

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose that the slide is blank and grid placement is optional, but it does not state default placement (for example, appended at the end of the deck) or permission requirements. This is a moderate gap rather than a serious omission.

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 with no waste, and the core action is front-loaded before the optional parameter detail.

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?

This is a simple creation tool with two optional, fully documented parameters and no output schema, so it does not need much more. The only missing piece an agent might want is default slide placement when row/col are omitted.

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 description coverage is 100%, and both col and row are already documented as 0-based grid indices. The description adds only that grid position is optional, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 and resource: 'Create a new blank slide in the Figma Slides presentation.' This distinguishes it from siblings such as figma_duplicate_slide and figma_add_text_to_slide, which modify or populate existing slides. It does not explicitly name a sibling, which keeps it below 5.

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 never states when to use this tool versus alternatives (figma_duplicate_slide for copies, figma_add_text_to_slide for content). The clause 'Optionally specify grid position' is a parameter note, not usage guidance.

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