Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Figxel

Figxel

by AvYour
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Delete styles

figma_delete_style
DestructiveIdempotent

Delete local styles (paint, text, effect, grid) by id. Nodes that used one keep the values it gave them. figma_get_styles lists ids. Returns per-item results: items: [{ id, ok, error? }] — one node failing does not fail the call.

Instructions

Delete local styles (paint, text, effect, grid) by id. Nodes that used one keep the values it gave them. figma_get_styles lists ids. Returns per-item results: items: [{ id, ok, error? }] — one node failing does not fail the call. Editors: Design; unverified: FigJam, Slides.

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.
styleIdsYes
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

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (destructiveHint, idempotentHint) by disclosing the key semantic consequence: 'Nodes that used one keep the values it gave them.' It also documents partial-failure behavior and the exact per-item result shape, and flags unverified editors — exactly the context an agent cannot 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, then consequences, then id source, then return shape, then environment. No sentence is redundant.

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

Completeness5/5

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

With no output schema, the description supplies the return contract ('items: [{ id, ok, error? }]') and the important partial-failure rule, plus the data-retention consequence for previously styled nodes. Nothing an agent needs to call this destructive tool safely is missing.

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 75% and the schema already fully documents force, session, and idempotencyKey; the description adds only that ids come 'by id' and can be sourced from figma_get_styles. The styleIds parameter's array shape and 500-item cap are left entirely to the schema, so this is baseline territory.

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?

States the specific verb and resource with scope: 'Delete local styles (paint, text, effect, grid) by id.' It explicitly enumerates the style types, which separates it from figma_delete_variable_collection, figma_delete_nodes, and mutation siblings like figma_update_style.

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?

Points to figma_get_styles as the source of ids, giving a clear prerequisite path, and states environment applicability ('Editors: Design; unverified: FigJam, Slides'). It stops short of explicitly naming a when-not-to-use case (e.g., removing a style from a node vs. deleting it), so it lands at 4.

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