Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Claude Talk to Figma MCP

Claude Talk to Figma MCP

by arinspunk
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

load_font_async

Load a font asynchronously in Figma by specifying the font family and optional style, enabling AI agents to manage fonts during design workflows.

Instructions

Load a font asynchronously in Figma

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": {
      "family": "<family>"
    },
    "name": "load_font_async"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
familyYesFont family name
styleNoFont style (e.g., 'Regular', 'Bold', 'Italic')

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.8.2
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  2. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.0.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / family
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Font family name",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / style
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Font style (e.g., 'Regular', 'Bold', 'Italic')",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / required
      Added value: +[
+  "family"
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The async nature is mentioned, but no details on return behavior, error handling, or side effects. With no annotations, the description should provide more behavioral context.

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?

A single sentence that is entirely non-redundant and front-loaded with key information. No unnecessary words.

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 file loading operation with no output schema, the description lacks critical context about async behavior, error states, and usage prerequisites. Minimal completeness.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score is appropriate.

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 (load) and resource (font) with the async qualifier. It is distinct from sibling tools like set_font_name which modify properties rather than loading.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives, or prerequisites such as font availability. The description lacks context for decision-making.

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