Deletes the prototype flow starting point from a specified Figma frame by node ID, clearing its interactive navigation trigger.
Remove the prototype flow starting point of a frame
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| nodeId | Yes | ID of the frame whose flow starting point should be removed |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It states the mutation but omits side effects, reversibility, permission requirements, or what happens if no flow starting point exists.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence with zero waste. It communicates the action and target immediately.
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 simple one-parameter mutation with full schema coverage, the description covers the core purpose. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it should disclose more about behavior (e.g., errors if no starting point) to be fully complete.
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 nodeId parameter is fully documented in the schema. The description adds no format or constraint details beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 applies.
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?
States a specific verb (Remove) and resource (prototype flow starting point of a frame), clearly distinguishing it from sibling set/get flow starting point tools by verb. No explicit sibling naming, but the verb makes the operation unambiguous.
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 when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives are mentioned. Usage is only implied by the tool name and description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.