Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Figxel

Figxel

by AvYour
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Flatten

figma_flatten_nodes
Idempotent

Flatten nodes into one editable vector (Ctrl+E) — for a finished icon or a boolean shape that should become a single path. They must share a parent. Cannot be undone except with Ctrl+Z. Editors: Design; unverified: FigJam, Slides.

Instructions

Flatten nodes into one editable vector (Ctrl+E) — for a finished icon or a boolean shape that should become a single path. They must share a parent. Cannot be undone except with Ctrl+Z. Editors: Design; unverified: FigJam, Slides.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo
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.
nodeIdsYes
sessionNoOptional sessionId or file name, to pick a Figma file when more than one is connected.
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

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Adds real context beyond annotations: the parent-sharing precondition, the reversibility caveat ("Cannot be undone except with Ctrl+Z"), and per-editor availability (Design verified; FigJam/Slides unverified). Annotations only declare the safety/idempotency flags, so this is genuine added value. It does not say what happens to child layers, fills, or effects after the merge.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and keyboard shortcut, then precondition, then risk, then editor support. No filler and nothing misplaced.

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 destructive-ish structural mutation with no output schema, the description covers the prerequisite, reversibility, and platform availability, which is most of what an agent needs. It leaves open what the resulting node looks like (name, id, whether the merge preserves effects) and why one would pass `force` here.

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 description coverage is 60% and the description adds nothing about any of the five parameters — no word on the optional `name` (undocumented in the schema), on `force`/`idempotencyKey` semantics, or on batching 200 node IDs. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already documents force, session, and idempotencyKey thoroughly.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ("Flatten nodes into one editable vector") and states the resulting artifact plus the shortlist of use cases (finished icon, boolean shape becoming one path). An agent can distinguish this from figma_boolean_nodes or figma_group_nodes without opening a 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 a concrete when-to-use condition ("a finished icon or a boolean shape that should become a single path") and a hard prerequisite ("They must share a parent"). It does not name the sibling alternatives (group/boolean/combine) or state when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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