Skip to main content
Glama
grab

Talk to Figma MCP

by grab

set_stroke_color

Change the stroke color of a Figma node by specifying RGB values, alpha, and stroke weight to customize design elements programmatically.

Instructions

Set the stroke color of a node in Figma

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
aNoAlpha component (0-1)
bYesBlue component (0-1)
gYesGreen component (0-1)
nodeIdYesThe ID of the node to modify
rYesRed component (0-1)
weightNoStroke weight

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function that proxies the set_stroke_color command to the Figma plugin via sendCommandToFigma, including success/error responses.
    async ({ nodeId, r, g, b, a, weight }: any) => {
      try {
        const result = await sendCommandToFigma("set_stroke_color", {
          nodeId,
          color: { r, g, b, a: a || 1 },
          weight: weight || 1,
        });
        const typedResult = result as { name: string };
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text",
              text: `Set stroke color of node "${typedResult.name
                }" to RGBA(${r}, ${g}, ${b}, ${a || 1}) with weight ${weight || 1}`,
            },
          ],
        };
      } catch (error) {
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text",
              text: `Error setting stroke color: ${error instanceof Error ? error.message : String(error)
                }`,
            },
          ],
        };
      }
    }
  • Zod input schema defining parameters for the set_stroke_color tool.
    {
      nodeId: z.string().describe("The ID of the node to modify"),
      r: z.number().min(0).max(1).describe("Red component (0-1)"),
      g: z.number().min(0).max(1).describe("Green component (0-1)"),
      b: z.number().min(0).max(1).describe("Blue component (0-1)"),
      a: z.number().min(0).max(1).optional().describe("Alpha component (0-1)"),
      weight: z.number().positive().optional().describe("Stroke weight"),
    },
  • Registration of the set_stroke_color tool with the MCP server using server.tool.
    server.tool(
      "set_stroke_color",
      "Set the stroke color of a node in Figma",
      {
        nodeId: z.string().describe("The ID of the node to modify"),
        r: z.number().min(0).max(1).describe("Red component (0-1)"),
        g: z.number().min(0).max(1).describe("Green component (0-1)"),
        b: z.number().min(0).max(1).describe("Blue component (0-1)"),
        a: z.number().min(0).max(1).optional().describe("Alpha component (0-1)"),
        weight: z.number().positive().optional().describe("Stroke weight"),
      },
      async ({ nodeId, r, g, b, a, weight }: any) => {
        try {
          const result = await sendCommandToFigma("set_stroke_color", {
            nodeId,
            color: { r, g, b, a: a || 1 },
            weight: weight || 1,
          });
          const typedResult = result as { name: string };
          return {
            content: [
              {
                type: "text",
                text: `Set stroke color of node "${typedResult.name
                  }" to RGBA(${r}, ${g}, ${b}, ${a || 1}) with weight ${weight || 1}`,
              },
            ],
          };
        } catch (error) {
          return {
            content: [
              {
                type: "text",
                text: `Error setting stroke color: ${error instanceof Error ? error.message : String(error)
                  }`,
              },
            ],
          };
        }
      }
    );
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. 'Set' implies a mutation, but the description doesn't disclose whether this requires specific permissions, if changes are reversible, what happens to existing stroke settings, or error conditions. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this lacks critical behavioral context about side effects and constraints.

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, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's front-loaded with the core action and target, making it immediately scannable. Every word earns its place, and there's no redundant or verbose phrasing.

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 this is a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, error handling, or behavioral nuances. While the schema covers parameters well, the overall context for safe and effective use is lacking, especially for a tool that modifies design assets.

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 description coverage is 100%, with all parameters well-documented in the schema (e.g., 'Alpha component (0-1)', 'The ID of the node to modify'). The description adds no parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, but since schema coverage is high, baseline 3 is appropriate as 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 ('Set') and target ('stroke color of a node in Figma'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'set_fill_color' by specifying stroke rather than fill, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with all siblings. The description is specific but could be more precise about what 'set' entails.

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 like 'set_fill_color' or 'set_corner_radius'. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a valid nodeId) or contextual constraints. Usage is implied by the action but without explicit when/when-not instructions or named alternatives.

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

Related 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/grab/cursor-talk-to-figma-mcp'

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