Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Figxel

Figxel

by AvYour
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Reparent nodes

figma_reparent_nodes
Idempotent

Move nodes to a new parent (frame, group, component, section, slide or page), optionally at a given index. A node keeps its x/y numbers, now relative to the new parent; keepPosition: true keeps its place on the canvas instead (a sticky…

Instructions

Move nodes to a new parent (frame, group, component, section, slide or page), optionally at a given index. A node keeps its x/y numbers, now relative to the new parent; keepPosition: true keeps its place on the canvas instead (a sticky dropped into a section), or x/y place it in the new parent. A moved connector's item carries a warning: its route may need recreating. Slides move with figma_move_slides. Returns per-item results: items: [{ id, ok, error? }] — one node failing does not fail the call. Editors: Design; unverified: FigJam, Slides.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
xNoIn the new parent's coordinates, set after the move. Not with keepPosition.
yNo
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.
indexNoInsertion index. Omit to append.
nodeIdsYes
sessionNoOptional sessionId or file name, to pick a Figma file when more than one is connected.
parentIdYesThe new parent.
keepPositionNoKeep each node's place on the canvas. Default false.
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

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well past the annotations: discloses that a moved connector carries a warning about a broken route, that results are per-item so one failure doesn't fail the call, and which editors are supported vs unverified. These are operational facts an agent can't get from readOnly/idempotent hints.

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-loads the action and parent types, then layers the positioning nuance and return shape. Dense but every clause carries information; slightly overpacked with parentheticals.

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?

For a 9-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description supplies the return shape (items with id/ok/error), partial-failure semantics, edge-case behavior (connector routes), and editor availability. Nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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?

With 78% schema coverage the baseline is 3, and the description earns a bump by explaining the semantic consequence of keepPosition ('keeps its place on the canvas, e.g. a sticky dropped into a section') and that x/y are in the new parent's coordinates. The index and force parameters are left to the schema.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Move nodes to a new parent') and enumerates valid parent types, which lets an agent distinguish it from figma_move_nodes (canvas position) and figma_reorder_nodes (sibling order). The sibling routing for slides is named outright.

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?

Names an explicit alternative for one case ('Slides move with figma_move_slides') and clarifies the choice between keepPosition, x/y, and default coordinate behavior. It doesn't systematically distinguish itself from figma_move_nodes or figma_group_nodes, so exclusion coverage is partial.

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