figma_update_variable

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral details. It only mentions the transport method (REST API, no plugin) and omits important aspects like whether the update merges with existing properties, permission requirements, or side effects. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundancy. It efficiently conveys the main action and a key implementation detail.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, this description is too sparse. It does not mention return values, error conditions, or operational constraints, which an agent would need for reliable use.

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 coverage is only 20% (fileKey has a description); the description adds meaning for three parameters by listing 'name, description, scopes'. However, it does not explain the scopes array contents or the variableId parameter, leaving required fields under-specified.

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 ('Update'), target ('variable'), and affected properties ('name, description, scopes'), distinguishing it from variable creation or value-setting tools like figma_create_variable and figma_set_variable_value. The REST API note adds useful context about how the operation is performed.

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?

It implies usage when updating variable metadata but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over sibling tools such as figma_set_variable_value. The description lacks alternative guidance or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer from the property list.

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