figma-mcp-go

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

The description contradicts the annotations: it uses the verb 'Get' implying a read-only retrieval operation, while annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, indicating a destructive write operation. The description fails to disclose any destructive behavior, side effects, or mutation risks.

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 consists of two highly efficient sentences with zero waste. It front-loads the purpose ('Get a specific Figma node') and immediately follows with the critical format constraint, placing the most important information first.

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 destructiveHint annotation indicates irreversible side effects, the description is dangerously incomplete. It fails to explain what gets destroyed or modified during a 'get' operation, and with no output schema provided, the agent lacks critical behavioral context for a destructive tool.

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?

While the schema has 100% coverage and fully documents the nodeId parameter, the description adds valuable emphasis on the format constraint ('never hyphens') that reinforces the schema requirements and clarifies a common error case.

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 states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('Figma node') with clear identification method ('by ID'). However, it does not differentiate from similar sibling tools like 'get_nodes_info' or 'get_document'.

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 provides explicit format guidance ('Must use colon format...never hyphens') which constrains usage. However, it lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_nodes' or 'get_nodes_info', and mentions no prerequisites.

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