figma_remove_flow

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. 'Remove a flow starting point' indicates mutation, but it does not explain side effects, idempotency, or what happens if the flow starting point does not exist. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the action itself.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose. It is appropriately sized and contains no filler or redundant information.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and an unexplained parameter, the description is too sparse. It does not clarify what constitutes a 'flow starting point', how nodeId should be determined, or what the result of the removal is, making it insufficient for an agent to reliably invoke the tool.

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 has one parameter, nodeId, with no description, and the description provides no additional meaning. It is unclear whether nodeId refers to the frame containing the flow or the flow starting point node itself. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate, leaving the parameter ambiguous.

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 specifies the action ('Remove'), the resource ('flow starting point'), and the location ('from a frame'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like figma_create_flow and figma_get_flows, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 implies usage: it should be used when a flow starting point needs to be removed from a frame. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or how it differs from related tools like figma_remove_interactions or figma_delete_node.

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