set_selections

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the core side effect (selecting nodes) and the viewport scrolling behavior, which is exactly the kind of non-obvious effect an agent needs to know. It does not mention whether the prior selection is replaced, but that is strongly implied.

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 sentence that front-loads the primary action and immediately adds the important viewport behavior. Every word earns its place and there is no filler.

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 one fully documented parameter and no output schema, the description is complete. An agent knows what it does, what side effects occur, and what input is required. Nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%: nodeIds is fully described as 'Array of node IDs to select'. The description does not add extra parameter-level detail, but it does not need to because the schema already documents the only parameter sufficiently.

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 action ('Set selection') on a specific resource ('multiple nodes in Figma') and adds the scroll-viewport effect. This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling get_selection and other node-scoped tools without needing to open the schema.

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 makes it clear the tool is used when the agent wants to select multiple nodes and bring them into view. It does not explicitly name alternatives or conditions when not to use it, but the use case is unambiguous among the sibling tools.

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