Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Figxel

Figxel

by AvYour
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Figma bridge status

figma_status
Read-only

Bridge and plugin connection status: whether this process holds the Figma connection or shares it, every connected Figma file (session id, file, page, user, plugin version), each file's editor (Figma Design, FigJam or Figma Slides) with…

Instructions

Bridge and plugin connection status: whether this process holds the Figma connection or shares it, every connected Figma file (session id, file, page, user, plugin version), each file's editor (Figma Design, FigJam or Figma Slides) with the tools that do not run there (unavailableTools), the active session, the version of the skills figma_get_guide serves (skills), the process mode, the skills read and this session's briefs (process), the stale-write guard (bridge.conflicts: refuse, warn or off), this server's token file and fingerprint (the plugin window shows its own) with refused tokens (auth), video export state (videoExport, video: ffmpeg), and a hint for what to do next. Answered by the bridge itself — works even when no plugin is connected. Call this first, and whenever another figma_ tool returns NO_SESSION, PORT_IN_USE, or UNSUPPORTED naming an editor.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 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 declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, and the description is consistent with that (pure inspection, no mutation). It adds non-obvious behavior the annotations cannot convey: the answer comes from the bridge itself and works even with no plugin connected, plus it discloses the stale-write conflict modes (refuse/warn/off) and auth fingerprint semantics.

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?

The core guidance ('Call this first, and whenever...') is placed at the end but is a single crisp sentence. The middle is one very long enumerated clause covering ten output areas, which is dense and hard to parse, though it is defensible given there is no output schema to carry those field descriptions.

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 zero parameters, no output schema, and only readOnly/openWorld annotations, the description carries the full burden and does: it documents the returned field groups, the diagnostic purpose, and the recovery conditions. An agent has everything needed to decide to call it and to interpret the response.

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?

The tool takes no parameters, so the baseline is 4 and there is no parameter semantics to explain. The description instead spends its words on return-value content, which is the relevant substitute for a parameterless tool.

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 specifically that this reports bridge and plugin connection status, and enumerates what the report contains (connected files, editor type, active session, conflicts, auth, video export). No sibling tool does this — it is the only diagnostic/status entry point in the set — so it is trivially distinguishable.

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?

Explicitly instructs 'Call this first' and names the precise trigger conditions for re-calling: NO_SESSION, PORT_IN_USE, or UNSUPPORTED naming an editor. This is an unambiguous when-to-use rule tied to concrete error codes returned by sibling tools.

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