Find and replace text in Figma node names across a page or subtree. Use regex, preview changes with dryRun, and review a before/after diff before applying.
Find-and-replace text in node names across a subtree (defaults to current page). Supports regex and dryRun. Returns a before/after diff.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| find | Yes | ||
| dryRun | No | ||
| replace | No | ||
| useRegex | No | ||
| rootNodeId | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the regex capability, a dryRun preview mode, the default scope (current page), and the before/after diff return. However, it never states that matching is destructive/irreversible once dryRun is off, nor what permissions or undo path exist.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three tight sentences, zero filler, with the core action front-loaded ahead of modifiers and the return-value note last. Every clause carries information.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a 5-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential mechanics (what changes, scope, preview, return). It still omits irreversibility, required auth, and how rootNodeId is specified, leaving real gaps for a bulk mutation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains useRegex and dryRun by name, implies find/replace, and implies rootNodeId via 'subtree (defaults to current page)' – covering four of five params conceptually, though without naming rootNodeId or giving format/syntax details.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb+resource ('Find-and-replace text in node names') and narrows scope ('across a subtree, defaults to current page'). This implicitly separates it from sibling find_and_replace_text (text content) and rename_node (single node), but never names those alternatives explicitly.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Gives no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and does not point to the obvious alternative (rename_node for a single node, find_and_replace_text for text content). The subtree-default note hints at selection context but is not framed as a usage condition.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.