Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Figma Bridge MCP

Figma Bridge MCP

by Halil-KAPLAN
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

figma_set_fill

Need to change a Figma node's color? Set its fill to any hex color by providing the node ID and hex code.

Instructions

Change fill color of a node (hex color)

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>",
      "hex": "<hex>"
    },
    "name": "figma_set_fill"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
hexYesHex color e.g. "#FF0000"
nodeIdYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It indicates a write operation ('change') but does not disclose whether it overwrites existing fills, works on all node types, or is reversible. Missing behavioral context for a mutation tool.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is a single sentence, which is concise but lacks structure. It could be expanded to include usage guidance without becoming verbose. The brevity leads to omissions.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the low schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description should provide more context. It does not specify the effect on multiple fills, error conditions, or return value, making it incomplete for practical use.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 50% (nodeId lacks description). The description only mentions hex color format, which is already in the schema. It does not explain what nodeId represents or how to obtain it, leaving a gap.

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 action ('Change fill color') and the resource ('a node') with the hex format specified. It distinguishes from sibling tools that handle different operations (create, delete, move, etc.), but does not explicitly differentiate from other color-related modifications.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., node exists, is selected) or exclusions (e.g., for text nodes use figma_set_text).

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