figma_set_default_transition

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only says 'set default transition'—implying a mutation—but does not mention whether it is destructive, requires specific permissions, how it affects existing transitions, or what the return behavior is. This is a significant gap for a write operation.

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 concise sentence with no wasted words or redundant information. It is appropriately front-loaded, though its brevity veers toward under-specification, which prevents a perfect score.

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?

Despite having 5 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description provides only a bare action statement. It lacks essential context about parameter semantics, usage conditions, and expected outcomes, making it completely inadequate for reliable invocation.

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 5 parameters (nodeId, transition, duration, easing, direction) with 0% description coverage, and the description entirely fails to mention or explain any of them. It does not compensate for the schema's lack of detail, leaving the agent with no guidance on what values mean or how they interact.

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 ('set') and the resource ('default transition') scoped to 'this frame,' which conveys the tool's core purpose. However, it does not differentiate this from other set_* tools or explain what 'default transition' means in context, so it loses the full top score.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_interaction or remove_interactions. The description gives no context on prerequisites, typical scenarios, or why one would choose this over other transition-related tools.

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