Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Figxel

Figxel

by AvYour
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Create slot

figma_create_slot
Idempotent

Add a slot to a component: a frame that each instance fills with its own layers, plus the SLOT property that goes with it. Pass a component or one variant, not a set. layout horizontal or vertical (Figma refuses a grid on a slot).

Instructions

Add a slot to a component: a frame that each instance fills with its own layers, plus the SLOT property that goes with it. Pass a component or one variant, not a set. layout horizontal or vertical (Figma refuses a grid on a slot). Fill it in an instance by creating content with parentId = the slot inside that instance; figma_reset_slot empties it again. figma_set_instance_properties cannot set a slot. Editors: Design; unverified: FigJam, Slides.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoe.g. "Content", "Actions".
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.
widthNo
heightNo
layoutNoAuto-layout direction of the slot.
sizingNoHow it sizes, as in Figma's panel: { "horizontal": "fill" } to take the parent column's width; "hug" fits content; "fixed" keeps the number.
sessionNoOptional sessionId or file name, to pick a Figma file when more than one is connected.
componentIdYesA COMPONENT, or one variant of a set.
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

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (readOnly false, destructive false, idempotent true), and the description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond them: the slot-property relationship, instance fill mechanics, the grid refusal, the inability for figma_set_instance_properties to set a slot, and editor/platform availability including unverified platforms.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is compact and front-loaded: it starts with the core create action, then adds constraints and alternatives without redundant restatement. Each sentence contributes a distinct operational detail.

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 9-parameter create tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential invocation semantics, constraints, sibling alternatives, and platform availability. The only minor gap is that it does not describe the return value, but the schema and annotations together make the definition sufficiently complete.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 78%, so the schema already carries substantial parameter documentation. The description still adds operational meaning for key parameters, especially that componentId must be a component or one variant (not a set) and that layout accepts horizontal or vertical because Figma refuses a grid on a slot.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: add a slot to a component, defining what a slot is (a frame filled per instance) and the associated SLOT property. It also distinguishes the tool from related operations by noting a component or one variant must be passed, not a set, and that figma_set_instance_properties cannot set a slot.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It gives clear usage conditions: pass a component or one variant rather than a set, use horizontal or vertical layout because Figma refuses a grid on a slot, fill it in an instance via parentId, and use figma_reset_slot to empty it again. These are explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use constraints with named alternatives.

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