CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

figma-automation

Automate Figma tasks via Rube MCP (Composio): files, components, design tokens, comments, exports. Always search tools first for current schemas.

56

Quality

65%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills-claude/skills/figma-automation/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is figma-automation in administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

61%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is well-structured and highly actionable, giving exact tool slugs and parameter specs, but it suffers from redundant sections and lacks validation checkpoints in its batch/destructive workflows. No bundle files exist, so progressive disclosure relies entirely on in-file sectioning.

Suggestions

Collapse the duplicate "Known Pitfalls" section into the per-workflow Pitfalls (or vice versa) and trim the "Common Patterns" block that restates node traversal already shown in Core Workflows.

Add explicit validation steps inside the rendering and comment workflows (e.g., after FIGMA_RENDER_IMAGES_OF_FILE_NODES, check for null node_id entries before calling FIGMA_DOWNLOAD_FIGMA_IMAGES).

Move the Quick Reference tool catalog into a separate references file (e.g., TOOL_REFERENCE.md) and link to it, keeping SKILL.md a lean overview.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows, but it carries real redundancy: "Known Pitfalls" repeats the per-workflow pitfalls, and "Common Patterns" plus the Quick Reference table restate tool slugs and traversal steps already covered above.

3 / 5

Actionability

Gives concrete tool slugs and exact parameter specs (e.g., "ids: Comma-separated node IDs (NOT an array)", scale 0.01-4.0, format options), which is mostly executable guidance; the gap is that it offers no literal code blocks and defers schemas to a runtime RUBE_SEARCH_TOOLS call.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Each workflow has a clearly numbered tool sequence with [Prerequisite]/[Required]/[Optional] markers, but batch/destructive operations (image rendering, adding comments) lack in-workflow validation checkpoints, so per the feedback-loop cap workflow clarity cannot exceed 3.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized into Prerequisites, Setup, Core Workflows, Common Patterns, Known Pitfalls, and Quick Reference with no nested references, but at over 180 lines everything is inlined with no separate reference file for the bulky tool catalog, which is a minor organization gap short of 5.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

70%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description is specific and distinct, naming a clear Figma-via-Rube-MCP niche with concrete capability targets, but it omits any explicit "Use when..." trigger guidance, which caps completeness. Trigger terms are good though not comprehensive.

Suggestions

Add an explicit "Use when..." clause naming the user situations that should trigger this skill (e.g., 'Use when automating Figma file inspection, component extraction, design-token export, or comment management').

Replace the generic verb "Automate ... tasks" with distinct action verbs per target (e.g., 'inspect files, extract components, export design tokens, manage comments, render exports') to reach comprehensive specificity.

Include a synonym or natural phrasing a user might say (e.g., 'Figma designs', 'design tokens') to broaden trigger coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the Figma domain plus five concrete targets ("files, components, design tokens, comments, exports"), but the only verb is the generic "Automate ... tasks", so it falls short of the multi-verb comprehensive anchor at 5.

4 / 5

Completeness

It clearly states what the skill does but provides no "Use when..." clause or equivalent trigger guidance, so per the judging guideline completeness is capped at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural user terms ("Figma", "components", "design tokens", "comments", "exports") with good coverage, but lacks synonyms or file-extension variants that the 5 anchor expects.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The phrase "Figma tasks via Rube MCP (Composio)" carves a narrow, specific niche with distinct triggers and minimal overlap risk with other skills.

5 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills
Reviewed

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.