figma_set_constraints

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It does not mention side effects, whether it overrides existing constraints, permission requirements, or the return value. The phrase 'Set' implies mutation but provides no additional behavioral context.

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, focused sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized for a simple mutation tool, though it could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose.

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 lack of annotations, an output schema, and any parameter description, this is incomplete. The tool has three required parameters with enums, but the description fails to explain the concept of constraints, typical use cases, or what happens when the tool is invoked. An agent would struggle to invoke it correctly without additional context.

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 0% — the description mentions no parameter names or meanings. The schema provides enum values (MIN, MAX, CENTER, STRETCH, SCALE) but the description does not explain their semantic significance. The agent must rely entirely on the schema, which is insufficient for understanding how to choose values.

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 identifies the action ('Set') and the resource ('resize constraints') applied to a node. It is specific enough to distinguish from other setting tools like figma_set_opacity, but it does not elaborate on what 'resize constraints' means or how it relates to siblings like figma_resize_node.

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. No mention of prerequisites, contexts, or exclusions. The description simply states the action, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name.

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