Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@echobt/figma-mcp

@echobt/figma-mcp

by echobt
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

list_archive_contents

List all files inside a .fig archive to inventory its contents. Identify components and assets stored within the Figma file without opening it.

Instructions

List all files contained in the .fig archive.

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": {
      "filePath": "<filePath>"
    },
    "name": "list_archive_contents"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filePathYesPath to the .fig file

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.3.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only operation by stating 'List all files,' but does not disclose permissions, potential side effects, or performance implications. For a simple read tool, this is minimal but not insufficient.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and efficient for an AI agent to parse.

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?

The description lacks information about the output format (e.g., list of file paths or names). Given the absence of an output schema, the description should provide context on what 'all files' means structurally.

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%, and the description of the single parameter 'filePath' in the schema is adequate. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so it meets baseline expectations.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's action ('List all files') and resource ('contained in the .fig archive'), using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_document_summary or list_pages.

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. Sibling tools include list_pages, list_nodes_with_fills, and list_images, but the description does not differentiate usage contexts.

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