Skip to main content
Glama

create_rectangle

Add rectangular shapes to Figma designs by specifying position, dimensions, and optional parent elements for precise layout control.

Instructions

Create a new rectangle in Figma

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
xYesX position
yYesY position
widthYesWidth of the rectangle
heightYesHeight of the rectangle
nameNoOptional name for the rectangle
parentIdNoOptional parent node ID to append the rectangle to

Implementation Reference

  • The async handler function that executes the 'create_rectangle' tool logic. It forwards the parameters to Figma via sendCommandToFigma and returns a textual response with the result or error.
    async ({ x, y, width, height, name, parentId }) => {
      try {
        const result = await sendCommandToFigma("create_rectangle", {
          x,
          y,
          width,
          height,
          name: name || "Rectangle",
          parentId,
        });
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text",
              text: `Created rectangle "${JSON.stringify(result)}"`,
            },
          ],
        };
      } catch (error) {
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text",
              text: `Error creating rectangle: ${error instanceof Error ? error.message : String(error)}`,
            },
          ],
        };
      }
    }
  • Zod input schema defining parameters for the create_rectangle tool: x, y, width, height, optional name, and parentId.
      x: z.number().describe("X position"),
      y: z.number().describe("Y position"),
      width: z.number().describe("Width of the rectangle"),
      height: z.number().describe("Height of the rectangle"),
      name: z.string().optional().describe("Optional name for the rectangle"),
      parentId: z
        .string()
        .optional()
        .describe("Optional parent node ID to append the rectangle to"),
    },
  • Direct registration of the 'create_rectangle' MCP tool via server.tool(), specifying name, description, input schema, and handler.
      "create_rectangle",
      "Create a new rectangle in Figma",
      {
        x: z.number().describe("X position"),
        y: z.number().describe("Y position"),
        width: z.number().describe("Width of the rectangle"),
        height: z.number().describe("Height of the rectangle"),
        name: z.string().optional().describe("Optional name for the rectangle"),
        parentId: z
          .string()
          .optional()
          .describe("Optional parent node ID to append the rectangle to"),
      },
      async ({ x, y, width, height, name, parentId }) => {
        try {
          const result = await sendCommandToFigma("create_rectangle", {
            x,
            y,
            width,
            height,
            name: name || "Rectangle",
            parentId,
          });
          return {
            content: [
              {
                type: "text",
                text: `Created rectangle "${JSON.stringify(result)}"`,
              },
            ],
          };
        } catch (error) {
          return {
            content: [
              {
                type: "text",
                text: `Error creating rectangle: ${error instanceof Error ? error.message : String(error)}`,
              },
            ],
          };
        }
      }
    );
  • Higher-level registration call to registerCreationTools(server), which includes the create_rectangle tool, as part of all tools registration.
    registerCreationTools(server);
  • Top-level call to registerTools(server) in the main server initialization, which chains to registering the create_rectangle tool.
    registerTools(server);
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Create a new rectangle' implies a write/mutation operation, but the description doesn't disclose any behavioral traits like permission requirements, whether the rectangle becomes part of the current selection, what happens on creation failure, or any rate limits. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is extremely concise at just 5 words, front-loading the essential information ('Create a new rectangle in Figma') with zero wasted words. Every word earns its place in this minimal but complete statement of purpose.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what happens after creation (does it return the new rectangle's ID? does it become selected?), doesn't mention error conditions, and provides no behavioral context. The description should do more to compensate for the lack of structured metadata.

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?

The description provides no parameter information beyond what's already in the schema. However, with 100% schema description coverage, all 6 parameters (x, y, width, height, name, parentId) are already documented in the input schema with clear descriptions. The baseline score of 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('Create a new rectangle') and the target resource ('in Figma'), which provides specific verb+resource information. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from sibling tools like create_ellipse, create_frame, or create_polygon, which all create different shapes in Figma.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are multiple sibling tools for creating different shapes (ellipse, frame, polygon, star), but the description doesn't mention any context for choosing a rectangle over other shapes or when this tool is appropriate.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/agenisea/cc-fig-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server