figma_resize_node
Resize a Figma node by providing its node ID and desired width and height.
Instructions
Resize a node
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| width | Yes | ||
| height | Yes | ||
| nodeId | Yes |
Resize a Figma node by providing its node ID and desired width and height.
Resize a node
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| width | Yes | ||
| height | Yes | ||
| nodeId | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as whether the operation is reversible, requires permissions, or triggers side effects.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is extremely concise at 3 words, but this brevity comes at the cost of missing critical information. It is not appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the lack of annotations and output schema, and the need to document three parameters, the description is wholly insufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no meaning to the parameters (nodeId, width, height). It does not explain units, valid ranges, or how parameters affect the resize operation.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description 'Resize a node' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the action. It is distinct from sibling tools like figma_move_node or figma_set_fill, though it does not explicitly differentiate them.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no context about prerequisites, constraints, or typical use cases.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Halil-KAPLAN/figma-bridge-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server