figma-mcp-go

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

Description implies a read-only retrieval ('Get'), but annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. This contradiction fails to disclose the tool's mutating nature and creates false safety expectations.

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?

Two sentences with zero waste: first defines the operation and return structure, second provides essential domain context (design tokens). Appropriately front-loaded.

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?

Explains return value structure well (collections, modes, values) compensating for missing output schema. However, incomplete due to failure to address the destructive behavior indicated in annotations, which is critical context for invocation safety.

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?

Zero parameters present, establishing baseline 4. The description mentions 'local' which provides useful scope context not captured in the schema, though no parameter semantics are needed.

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?

Specific verb ('Get') and resource ('local variable definitions') with clear scope (collections, modes, values). The 'design token system' context distinguishes it from sibling get_styles (which handles styles, not tokens).

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 explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives like export_tokens or create_variable. While 'local' implies scope (vs. library variables), there are no explicit when/when-not statements.

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