Imports a local JSON scene and converts it into native, editable Figma nodes so you can edit and reuse the design directly on the canvas.
Import a local JSON scene as native editable Figma nodes. Prefer use_figma for complex components, variables, graphs or Slides. See the scene reference.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| nodes | Yes | ||
| parentId | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It says nothing about that this is a mutating write operation, permission or session requirements, what happens to existing nodes under parentId, failure/partial-import behavior, or the 500-node cap that the schema imposes.
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?
Two front-loaded sentences plus a reference pointer, with zero filler. The core purpose precedes the alternative-tool caveat in the right order.
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?
Given the loose nested schema and absence of an output schema, the description would benefit from noting the return value and how the scene JSON maps to nodes. However, the explicit pointer to the scene reference partially offsets the missing parameter detail.
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, yet it never explains the 'nodes' array shape (type/props/children recursion) or the optional 'parentId'. 'See the scene reference' is an external pointer rather than semantic guidance, leaving both parameters underspecified.
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 and resource ('Import a local JSON scene as native editable Figma nodes') and names the sibling it is not suited for. An agent can distinguish it from use_figma without opening either schema.
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?
Explicitly routes complex cases (components, variables, graphs, Slides) to use_figma, giving a clear alternative. It stops short of stating full preconditions such as where the JSON comes from or whether a session/parent must exist.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.