figma_set_focus

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for disclosing side effects. It mentions 'select' (implying selection changes) but omits behavior around zoomLevel, error handling, validation of nodeId, or whether the viewport scroll is animated. The lack of any context about side effects or prerequisites is a significant gap.

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. It is front-loaded and directly states the action. This is an example of efficient, minimal prose.

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 simple 2-parameter tool, the description covers the primary action, but it omits the zoomLevel parameter entirely and provides no usage context or prerequisites. With no annotations and no output schema, the description leaves too much unanswered for reliable tool 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate. It references 'a node' but does not explain that nodeId identifies the node or what zoomLevel does. The parameter names are self-descriptive to some extent, but no additional meaning is added beyond the schema.

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 uses specific verbs 'select' and 'scroll viewport' to identify the action and target. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like figma_set_selections (which only selects) and figma_get_viewport (which only reads the viewport).

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 the use case—when you need to bring a node into view and select it—but provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over alternatives like figma_set_selections or figma_get_viewport. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are given.

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