Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Figxel

Figxel

by AvYour
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Create connectors (FigJam)

figma_create_connectors
Idempotent

FigJam connector lines between nodes, 1–200 in one call. Each is made IN its final parent — by default the lowest section holding both ends, else the page — and never moved: a reparented connector keeps stale elbows, so build connectors…

Instructions

FigJam connector lines between nodes, 1–200 in one call. Each is made IN its final parent — by default the lowest section holding both ends, else the page — and never moved: a reparented connector keeps stale elbows, so build connectors last. Endpoints: One string: "12:34" (attach; magnet auto), "12:34@right" (magnet: auto, top, bottom, left, right, center, none), "12:34@0.5,1" (a point on the node, 0–1 of it — to be confirmed) or "120,340" (a free point). An end may not be another connector. lineType elbowed (default), straight or curved; caps default none at the start and arrow-lines at the end (ERD caps too); label is the visible text. Change one later with figma_edit_connectors. Editors: FigJam only, unverified.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
forceNoOverwrite on purpose. A write to a node someone changed after you last read it is refused (STALE); read it again and resend instead. Pass true only when the person said to overwrite their edit.
sessionNoOptional sessionId or file name, to pick a Figma file when more than one is connected.
parentIdNoWhere every connector goes: a section or a frame without auto-layout. Default: per connector, the lowest section holding both ends, else the page.
connectorsYes
idempotencyKeyNoCaller-owned retry key, ≤128 chars. Re-calling with the same key never executes twice: it returns the existing result, or waits for the op still in flight. Supply your own for anything large — if the MCP client times out (rather than the bridge), only a key you chose can be used to retry safely.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.3.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / force
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Overwrite on purpose. A write to a node someone changed after you last read it is refused (STALE); read it again and resend instead. Pass true only when the person said to overwrite their edit.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (which only mark it as a non-destructive, idempotent write): it discloses that connectors are created in their final parent and never moved, that reparenting leaves stale elbows, and that an endpoint cannot be another connector. It also flags environment risk ('FigJam only, unverified') and uncertainty in the point syntax, all of which the agent could not infer from structured fields.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the verb, resource, and batch limit, and every sentence carries real information (ordering, endpoints, styling, sibling). It is dense and heavily parenthetical, with some endpoint syntax duplicated from the schema, which costs a bit of tightness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 5-parameter batch-write with no output schema, it covers placement, ordering constraints, endpoint forms, styling defaults, and the edit path. The remaining gap is what a call returns (created connector identifiers/status), which it never mentions.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 80%, so the schema already documents endpoint syntax, lineType defaults, and cap defaults — and the description largely repeats those same strings. It adds marginal gloss (caps default none at start / arrow-lines at end, ERD caps) but no syntax or format details absent from the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Specific verb and resource with scope: 'FigJam connector lines between nodes, 1–200 in one call.' It distinguishes itself from figma_create_line (plain lines) and figma_edit_connectors (modifying an existing one), so an agent can pick it without opening the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives ordering advice ('build connectors last') and routes later changes to figma_edit_connectors, plus a hard scope exclusion ('FigJam only'). It does not explicitly contrast with figma_create_line for the same visual output, so usage context is clear but not fully disambiguated.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools