Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Figxel

Figxel

by AvYour
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Reorder nodes

figma_reorder_nodes
Idempotent

Change z-order within each node's current parent. Slides keep their deck order: figma_move_slides reorders them. Returns per-item results: items: [{ id, ok, error? }] — one node failing does not fail the call.

Instructions

Change z-order within each node's current parent. Slides keep their deck order: figma_move_slides reorders them. 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.
nodeIdsYes
sessionNoOptional sessionId or file name, to pick a Figma file when more than one is connected.
positionYes"front", "back", "forward", "backward", or an index as a string ("3").
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

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare non-readonly, idempotent, non-destructive, so safety is covered; the description adds partial-failure semantics ('one node failing does not fail the call') and editor coverage (Design verified, FigJam/Slides unverified). That is real value beyond structured fields, though it doesn't discuss ordering behavior across multiple parents.

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 core effect, then the sibling routing, then the return contract and editor support. No filler.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by describing the per-item return shape and partial-failure behavior. Editor support caveats are included; only multi-parent ordering semantics and the 500-item batch ceiling are unaddressed.

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% and the schema already documents position, force, session, and idempotencyKey with rich detail. The description adds no extra meaning about position values or batching limits, so baseline 3 applies.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb and resource: change z-order within each node's current parent. The 'within current parent' scoping distinguishes it from reparenting and from figma_move_nodes, though it doesn't name those siblings explicitly.

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?

Explicitly routes slide ordering to figma_move_slides ('Slides keep their deck order'), which is a clear alternative rule. It stops short of naming figma_move_nodes or figma_reparent_nodes as the tools for positional changes or hierarchy changes.

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