figma_set_slides_view_mode

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It usefully says this affects the "viewport," suggesting a local UI state change rather than a document mutation, but it does not disclose persistence, permissions, or whether the focused slide changes.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the operation, scope, and both modes immediately.

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 simple, single-parameter, no-output tool with full schema coverage, the description is essentially complete enough to invoke correctly. Minor gaps around preconditions and side effects remain, but they are low risk for a viewport toggle.

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% and the single enum parameter is already fully documented with both allowed values. The description restates the modes consistently but adds no parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 uses a specific verb ("Toggle") and resource ("Figma Slides viewport"), and explicitly names both modes it switches between. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling read/get tools such as figma_get_slide_grid and figma_focus_slide.

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 action implies when it would be used, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no comparison to alternatives. It also does not state when an agent should prefer grid view versus single-slide view.

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