figma-automation

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

2.34x

Quality

56%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

96%

2.34x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

Advisory

Suggest reviewing before use

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./plugins/all-skills/skills/figma-automation/SKILL.md

Quality

Discovery

50%

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 reasonably specific about capabilities and clearly targets a distinct niche (Figma automation via a specific MCP tool). However, it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause, which is critical for Claude to know when to select this skill. The trigger terms lean technical and miss common user language around design workflows.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user asks to automate Figma workflows, manage design tokens, export assets, or interact with Figma files programmatically.'

Include more natural user-facing trigger terms such as 'design system', 'UI design', 'mockups', 'prototypes', 'Figma API', or 'design assets' to improve keyword coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple specific concrete actions: files, components, design tokens, comments, exports. Also includes a concrete procedural instruction ('Always search tools first for current schemas').	3 / 3
Completeness	Describes what it does (automate Figma tasks) but has no explicit 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance. Per rubric guidelines, a missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 2, and the 'when' is not even implied beyond the domain mention, so this scores at 1.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes relevant keywords like 'Figma', 'components', 'design tokens', 'comments', 'exports', but misses common user variations like 'design system', 'UI design', 'prototypes', 'mockups', or file format terms. 'Rube MCP (Composio)' is technical jargon unlikely to be used by users.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The combination of 'Figma' and 'Rube MCP (Composio)' creates a very clear niche that is unlikely to conflict with other skills. The specific tool chain and domain make it highly distinctive.	3 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Implementation

62%

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

This is a well-organized reference skill with clear workflow sequences, good pitfall documentation, and a useful quick reference table. Its main weaknesses are the lack of concrete executable examples (actual tool call syntax with sample inputs/outputs) and some redundancy across sections. The content would benefit from being more concise by offloading detailed per-workflow information to separate files.

Suggestions

Add at least one concrete, executable MCP tool invocation example showing actual input parameters and expected output structure (e.g., a complete RUBE_SEARCH_TOOLS call with sample response).

Consolidate duplicated pitfalls (e.g., node ID format, file type support) into the 'Known Pitfalls' section only, and reference it from workflows instead of repeating.

Consider splitting detailed per-workflow parameters and pitfalls into a separate WORKFLOWS.md file, keeping SKILL.md as a concise overview with the quick reference table and setup instructions.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The skill is reasonably efficient but includes some redundancy — pitfalls are repeated (node ID format appears in both workflow sections and the 'Known Pitfalls' section), and the quick reference table partially duplicates information already covered in the workflow sections. Some trimming would improve token efficiency.	2 / 3
Actionability	Tool names and parameter details are specific and concrete, but there are no executable code examples — all guidance is in pseudo-workflow steps (e.g., 'Call FIGMA_DISCOVER_FIGMA_RESOURCES with figma_url'). Without showing actual MCP tool invocation syntax or concrete input/output examples, it falls short of copy-paste ready.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Each workflow has a clear 'when to use' trigger, a numbered tool sequence with prerequisite/required/optional labels, key parameters, and explicit pitfalls to avoid. The sequences are well-ordered with logical dependencies clearly marked.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The content is well-structured with clear sections and a quick reference table, but it's a long monolithic file (~180 lines of substantive content) with no references to separate detail files. The detailed pitfalls and parameter lists for each workflow could be split into referenced documents to keep the main skill leaner.	2 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Validation

90%

Warnings & errors only

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

Validation — 10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	10 / 11 Passed

Repository: davepoon/buildwithclaude
Commit: 7cc63f3

Reviewed: about 3 hours ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.