import_design

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

With no annotations provided, the description does useful work by disclosing that no Figma token or quota is required and that Downloads-folder exports are handled automatically. However, it does not explain what importing actually changes internally, how validation failures behave, or what the tool returns.

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 front-loaded with the core action and purpose, then adds the exception for non-Downloads files and the follow-up comparison step. There is no filler, and every sentence contributes useful information.

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 low-complexity, one-parameter import tool with no annotations or output schema, the description covers purpose, usage conditions, and the no-API constraint well. It stops short of describing import results or error behavior, but the essential invocation context is present.

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 100%, and the single path parameter is already described in the schema as the path of the .driftcheck.json file. The description adds useful context about the file's plugin origin and non-Downloads use case, but it does not add path syntax or format guidance.

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 and resource: importing a .driftcheck.json file exported from the Figma Driftcheck plugin. It also explains the purpose and condition, comparing without the Figma API when there is no token or quota, which distinguishes it from API-dependent siblings.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: files in Downloads are picked up automatically, so this tool is for files that ended up in another folder. It also indicates the workflow continues by comparing with the frame link as usual.

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