figma_get_file_versions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses the default filtering rule (labeled only), the auto-pagination cap tied to max_versions, the cursor contract, and the exact auth scopes required. Missing only return-shape/pagination envelope details beyond next_cursor, which keeps it off a 5.

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?

Six short sentences, each adding a distinct fact, with default behavior and the autosave toggle front-loaded. No filler or restatement of the tool name.

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?

No output schema or annotations exist, yet the description covers result metadata fields, the pagination mechanism, the default filter, and required credentials. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly and interpret the response.

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 all four parameters are already documented, making 3 the baseline. The description reinforces include_autosaves semantics and the max_versions cap but adds no syntax or format detail the schema doesn't already carry.

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 and resource ("List a Figma file's version history") plus the metadata returned, which is far more useful than a tautology. It never names the closely related siblings (figma_get_file_at_version, figma_diff_versions, figma_get_changes_since_version), so the agent must infer which versioning tool to reach for.

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?

Gives clear operating context: default behavior skips autosaves, include_autosaves=true expands scope, and pagination.next_cursor continues paging. It stops short of explicit when-not-to-use guidance or pointing to alternative version tools.

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