Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
conductor-figma

conductor-figma

by Dragoon0x
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

set_blend_mode

Apply a chosen blend mode to a Figma node. Specify the node ID and select from standard blend modes to change how layers composite.

Instructions

Set blend mode.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "nodeId": "<nodeId>"
    },
    "name": "set_blend_mode"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nodeIdYesTarget node
blendModeNoBlend mode

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv3.3.3

TDQS

D1.9/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Set blend mode' only restates the implied operation and does not disclose whether the change is persistent, whether blendMode is effectively required despite the schema listing only nodeId as required, what happens if blendMode is omitted, or any error conditions. This is effectively no behavioral transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

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

At three words, the description is under-specified rather than concisely informative. It repeats the tool name and contains no structural value such as scope, conditions, or examples.

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

Completeness1/5

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

With no output schema, no annotations, and only a tautological description, an agent cannot determine how to correctly invoke the tool, whether blendMode is optional, what the target node refers to, or what result to expect. The extensive sibling list provides no disambiguating help.

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 100%: nodeId is described as 'Target node' and blendMode as 'Blend mode'. The description adds no extra parameter meaning, but the high schema coverage sets the baseline at 3.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The description 'Set blend mode.' merely restates the tool name set_blend_mode, making it a tautology. It identifies the target property but gives no scope, context, or differentiation from sibling set_* tools such as set_fill or set_opacity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus the many sibling set_* operations. No conditions, exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative tool names are mentioned.

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