Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
figma-mcp-go

figma-mcp-go

by vkhanhqui
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Go
Local

reparent_nodes

Destructive

Move selected nodes to a new parent frame, group, or section to restructure your design.

Instructions

Move one or more nodes to a different parent frame, group, or section.

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": {
      "nodeIds": "<nodeIds>",
      "parentId": "<parentId>"
    },
    "name": "reparent_nodes"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nodeIdsYesNode IDs to move in colon format e.g. ['4029:12345']
parentIdYesTarget parent node ID in colon format e.g. '4029:99'

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.0.6

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The description only states the operation ('Move'), which aligns with the destructiveHint annotation, but adds no additional behavioral details such as side effects on child nodes, error conditions, or permissions needed.

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, clear sentence that is front-loaded with the key action. No extraneous words, making it highly concise.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate. It could mention the destructive nature or parent validity checks, but not essential given the annotations and simplicity.

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% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds no further meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Move') and resource ('nodes') and specifies the target ('different parent frame, group, or section'). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like 'move_nodes' by implying reparenting rather than just moving position.

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 (e.g., 'move_nodes', 'group_nodes'). No exclusionary conditions or context for selection are mentioned.

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