Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Figma Bridge MCP

Figma Bridge MCP

by Halil-KAPLAN
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

figma_move_node

Move a Figma node to a specific position by specifying its x and y coordinates.

Instructions

Move a node to new x,y position

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>",
      "x": "<x>",
      "y": "<y>"
    },
    "name": "figma_move_node"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
xYes
yYes
nodeIdYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No behavioral traits disclosed beyond the implied mutation. No mention of side effects, authorization needs, undoability, or return values. Description carries the full burden due to absent annotations.

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?

Extremely short (one sentence) but under-specified. Being concise is positive, but the content is too minimal to be useful; lacks structure and essential details.

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?

Given the sibling tools and lack of output schema, the description is grossly incomplete. No info on coordinates system, error handling, return value, or usage constraints. Inadequate for an agent to invoke correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0% for parameter descriptions. The description only reiterates 'new x,y position' without clarifying coordinate meaning (absolute/relative, units) or the role of nodeId. Fails to add value beyond schema.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'move' and the resource 'node', specifying the action to new x,y coordinates. It distinguishes from siblings like figma_resize_node or figma_create_frame, but lacks specificity on the coordinate system or units.

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?

No guidance provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., figma_resize_node does not move) or prerequisites (e.g., node must exist, must be on a page). Missing explicit context for selection.

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