Automate Figma tasks via Rube MCP (Composio): files, components, design tokens, comments, exports. Always search tools first for current schemas.
72
60%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
96%
2.34xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./plugins/all-skills/skills/figma-automation/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
57%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 identifies a clear niche (Figma automation via Rube MCP) and lists relevant domain areas, but falls short on specificity of actions and lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause. The trigger terms are adequate but could be expanded with more natural user language around design workflows.
Suggestions
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about Figma designs, UI components, design tokens, or exporting assets from Figma.'
Replace the category list with concrete actions, e.g., 'Retrieve and update Figma files, extract design tokens, post comments on designs, export assets as PNG/SVG.'
Include more natural trigger terms users might say, such as 'design', 'UI mockup', 'prototype', 'Figma project', or 'design system'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists domain areas (files, components, design tokens, comments, exports) but these are more like categories than concrete actions. It doesn't specify what actions are performed on these (e.g., 'create components', 'extract design tokens', 'export assets as PNG'). | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Answers 'what' (automate Figma tasks involving files, components, etc.) but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause. The 'when' is only implied by the mention of Figma. The instruction to 'always search tools first' is operational guidance, not a trigger condition. | 2 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes 'Figma' as a strong trigger term and mentions relevant concepts like 'components', 'design tokens', 'comments', 'exports'. However, it misses common user phrases like 'design', 'UI', 'mockup', 'prototype', '.fig files', or 'Figma plugin'. 'Rube MCP (Composio)' is technical jargon unlikely to be used by most users. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The combination of 'Figma' and 'Rube MCP (Composio)' creates a very distinct niche. It's unlikely to conflict with other skills since Figma automation via a specific MCP tool is highly specific. | 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 solid reference skill for Figma automation via Rube MCP with excellent workflow clarity—clear sequencing, labeled step priorities, and well-documented pitfalls. Its main weaknesses are the lack of concrete, executable tool call examples (actionability) and the monolithic structure that could benefit from splitting detailed workflow references into separate files. Some content is duplicated between workflow-specific pitfalls and the general Known Pitfalls section.
Suggestions
Add at least one fully concrete tool invocation example showing exact parameter syntax (e.g., a complete RUBE_SEARCH_TOOLS call followed by FIGMA_GET_FILE_JSON with real-looking parameters) to improve actionability.
Deduplicate the node ID format pitfall—mention it once in Known Pitfalls and reference that section from individual workflows instead of restating it.
Consider splitting the detailed workflow sections (parameters + pitfalls) into a separate WORKFLOWS.md reference file, keeping SKILL.md as a concise overview with the quick reference table and setup instructions.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is generally well-structured but includes some redundancy—pitfalls are repeated (node ID format appears in individual workflows AND in a dedicated 'Known Pitfalls' section), and the quick reference table partially duplicates the workflow tool sequences. The prerequisite reminder to 'always call RUBE_SEARCH_TOOLS first' is reasonable but some explanatory text could be tightened. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Tool sequences are clearly named with specific parameter details and pitfalls, which is valuable. However, there are no executable code examples or copy-paste-ready tool invocations with actual parameter syntax. The 'Common Patterns' section uses pseudocode-style numbered steps rather than concrete tool call examples with parameters filled in. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Workflows are clearly sequenced with labeled steps (Prerequisite, Required, Optional), explicit ordering, and pitfall callouts that serve as validation guidance. The setup section includes a verification step before proceeding. The node traversal pattern includes a progressive narrowing approach. Each workflow has clear 'when to use' context. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is well-organized with clear sections and a quick reference table, but it's a fairly long monolithic document (~170 lines of substantive content) with no bundle files to offload detail into. The detailed parameter lists and pitfalls for each workflow could be split into separate reference files, with the main SKILL.md serving as a leaner overview. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%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 | |
74c7031
Table of Contents
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.