Skip to main content
Glama
arinspunk

Claude Talk to Figma MCP

by arinspunk

get_local_components

Retrieve all local components from a Figma document to access reusable design elements for AI-assisted design workflows.

Instructions

Get all local components from the Figma document

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • Registration and handler implementation of the 'get_local_components' MCP tool. The handler forwards the request to the Figma plugin using sendCommandToFigma and formats the response as text content.
    server.tool(
      "get_local_components",
      "Get all local components from the Figma document",
      {},
      async () => {
        try {
          const result = await sendCommandToFigma("get_local_components");
          return {
            content: [
              {
                type: "text",
                text: JSON.stringify(result)
              }
            ]
          };
        } catch (error) {
          return {
            content: [
              {
                type: "text",
                text: `Error getting local components: ${error instanceof Error ? error.message : String(error)}`,
              },
            ],
          };
        }
      }
    );
  • Inline handler function that executes the tool logic by calling sendCommandToFigma('get_local_components') and returning the result.
    async () => {
      try {
        const result = await sendCommandToFigma("get_local_components");
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text",
              text: JSON.stringify(result)
            }
          ]
        };
      } catch (error) {
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text",
              text: `Error getting local components: ${error instanceof Error ? error.message : String(error)}`,
            },
          ],
        };
      }
    }
  • The 'get_local_components' command is defined in the FigmaCommand type union, used for type safety in websocket communications.
    | "get_local_components"
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states what the tool does but lacks critical behavioral details: whether it requires authentication, how it handles large documents (pagination/performance), what the return format looks like, or if there are rate limits. The description is minimal and doesn't compensate for the absence of annotations.

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 a single, clear sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any fluff or redundant information. It is front-loaded and efficiently communicates the core functionality, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 complexity (retrieval operation with no output schema) and lack of annotations, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what 'local components' entail (e.g., definition vs. instances), the return structure, error conditions, or dependencies. For a tool in a rich sibling set with no output schema, more context is needed to guide effective use.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool has 0 parameters, and the input schema has 100% description coverage (though empty). The description doesn't need to explain parameters, so it meets the baseline for a parameterless tool. No additional parameter semantics are required or provided.

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 ('Get') and resource ('all local components from the Figma document'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from sibling 'get_remote_components' by specifying 'local' components. However, it doesn't fully differentiate from other retrieval tools like 'get_document_info' or 'get_node_info' beyond the resource type.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an open document), compare it to 'get_remote_components' for component types, or indicate when other retrieval tools might be more appropriate for different data needs.

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/arinspunk/claude-talk-to-figma-mcp'

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