figma_create_variable_collection

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose one key behavioral trait: 'Uses REST API — no plugin required.' This is useful context for the agent. However, it omits other important traits like side effects (it is a create operation), potential failure modes (e.g., duplicate names), or required permissions. The note adds some value but lacks comprehensive behavioral disclosure.

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 concise and front-loaded, with two clear parts: the purpose and the note about using REST API. Both elements earn their place, and there is no wasted text. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

The description is minimal and lacks critical context. There is no output schema, no annotations, and the description does not explain return values, error conditions, or the semantics of the 'modes' parameter. It provides only the core purpose and one implementation detail, leaving the agent under-informed for execution.

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 only 33% (only fileKey has a description). The tool description provides no additional meaning for parameters like 'name' or 'modes'. Given the low coverage, the description was expected to compensate but does not, leaving the agent without sufficient semantic understanding of the parameters.

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 action ('Create') and the resource ('variable collection') with context ('for design tokens'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like figma_create_variable, which creates an individual variable, by specifying the collection level.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only notes that it uses the REST API and doesn't require a plugin, which is an implementation detail rather than a usage guideline. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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