figma_create_path

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions support for straight lines and smooth Catmull-Rom curves, and examples illustrate closure and colors, but it does not disclose details about node creation context, return values, or side effects beyond the obvious 'Create' statement.

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 well-structured and front-loaded: the first sentence states purpose, the second provides comparison, and the examples add practical context. It is concise enough for the tool's complexity without unnecessary filler.

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 tool has 10 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description provides a good starting point with examples but omits return value information and leaves several parameters unexplained (e.g., parentId, name, strokeWeight). It is adequate but not comprehensive for an agent.

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 schema covers 50% of parameters, and the description adds meaning through concrete examples showing how to use points, curveType, closed, fillColor, and strokeColor. However, it does not explain parameters like name, parentId, strokeWeight, or the top-level x/y, relying on the schema partially.

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 tool creates a vector path from points, with a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('vector path from points'). It distinguishes itself from sibling 'create_from_svg' by noting it is 'Much simpler for charts, curves, and shapes,' providing clear scope.

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 gives explicit context that this tool is preferable to create_from_svg for charts, curves, and shapes, guiding the agent on when to choose it. However, it does not explicitly state when to use create_from_svg instead, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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