generate_make_guidelines

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states the tool generates a folder and exports tokens/rules, but does not disclose if it overwrites existing files, requires permissions, or has side effects. This is adequate but leaves important behavioral traits unspecified.

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 brief, consisting of two sentences that concisely capture purpose. It front-loads the core action (generating a guidelines folder) and provides key format details (Markdown). No redundant information is present.

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 tool with two simple parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential functionality but lacks depth. It does not mention what the generated folder contains beyond tokens/rules, nor does it discuss integration with Figma Make. It is minimally complete but could be more informative.

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?

Both parameters have schema descriptions, achieving 100% coverage. The tool description reiterates the meaning of 'components' but adds no significant new semantics beyond the schema. A score of 3 is appropriate given the schema already documents the parameters.

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 tool generates a structured guidelines folder for Figma Make, exporting design tokens and component rules into Markdown. It is specific and distinct from sibling tools like 'search_tokens' or 'generate_component_docs', as none directly produce Figma Make guidelines.

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 tool is used when needing to provide design system context to Figma Make's AI, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives. No exclusions or prerequisite conditions are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage from context.

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