Field-by-field comparison

Compare the evidence before choosing an MCP.

Each signal stays separate, missing facts remain visible, and the column order follows your selection.

MCPs in this comparison

Uncheck an MCP to remove it. Comparing two or three keeps each signal in its own row.

Open canonical comparison link

Comparable alternatives

Shown only when capability or industry context overlaps.

Side-by-side MCP evidence comparison
Evidence fieldFigma MCPMCP100 SelectedFirecrawl MCPMCP100 Selected
Task fit
Best for
  • Turning selected Figma frames into implementation context
  • Design-system teams using variables, components, and Code Connect
  • Human-supervised creation or modification of native Figma content
  • Scraping and extracting public web pages
  • Search, crawl, map, batch, and research workflows
  • Teams already using Firecrawl API limits and governance
Not ideal for
  • MCP clients outside Figma's supported catalog
  • Teams expecting one-click pixel-perfect production code
  • Headless automation that cannot complete user OAuth
  • Simple known-page fetches that do not justify a paid API
  • Sites whose terms or access controls prohibit automated collection
  • Workflows requiring guaranteed freshness or extraction accuracy
Avoid when
  • Proprietary design content cannot be exposed to the selected AI client or model
  • Canvas writes cannot be reviewed before execution
  • A stable long-term zero-cost commitment is required
  • You cannot govern which URLs the agent may access
  • The workflow may collect personal, confidential, copyrighted, or access-controlled content without review
  • Unexpected API-credit consumption is unacceptable
Provenance
Provenance details

First-party MCP

Figma · Publisher source ↗

First-party MCP

Firecrawl · Publisher source ↗

Maintenance
Maintenance details

Repo: Not documented

Package: Not documented

Repo: Aug 12, 2026

Package: Aug 12, 2026

Popularity evidence
GitHub starsNot documented

7,234

GitHub stars · checked 2026-08-14T18:46:26.000Z

30-day package downloadsNo reliable download data

412,488

30-day package downloads · checked 2026-08-14T18:46:26.000Z

External adoption evidenceNot documented
  • github: repository stars: 7,234Exact attributable signal.github: repository stars · Admission snapshot · checked 2026-08-14T18:46:26.000ZEvidence source ↗
Client coverage
Client coverage details
Claude CodeStreamable HTTP
Claude DesktopStreamable HTTP
CodexStreamable HTTP
VS CodeStreamable HTTP
CursorStreamable HTTP
OpenCodeStreamable HTTP
Claude CodeLocal stdio
Claude DesktopLocal stdio
CodexLocal stdio
VS CodeLocal stdio
CursorLocal stdio
OpenCodeLocal stdio
Client coverage noteLocal stdio runs on your computer. Streamable HTTP connects to a remotely hosted MCP server.
Access and data
AuthenticationThe recommended remote server at https://mcp.figma.com/mcp uses user OAuth. Desktop mode relies on the signed-in Figma desktop application and its local endpoint.Cloud and local-package configurations use FIRECRAWL_API_KEY. Official docs also show hosted MCP URLs containing the key; environment-variable or protected input handling is safer than embedding the key in a URL.
CostFigma documents the MCP feature as free during its current beta and says it is expected to become usage-based paid. Underlying Figma plans and plan-specific features may also apply.MCP calls consume the account's standard Firecrawl API credits and rate limits. Search, crawl, batch, and agent operations can consume more resources than single-page scraping; current plan pricing applies.
PermissionsOAuth grants access to authorized Figma resources. Available tools can read design context and, in supported workflows, create or modify canvas content. Desktop mode can also serve or download image and SVG assets.The MCP can initiate outbound requests to user- or model-selected URLs and invoke Firecrawl scrape, search, crawl, map, extraction, batch, and research capabilities according to enabled tools and account limits.
Data handlingThe remote service retrieves design nodes, components, variables, layouts, and potentially Make or Code Connect resources and returns them to the MCP client. Desktop mode can write downloaded assets into the local project.URLs, queries, extraction schemas, and retrieved page content are processed by the configured Firecrawl service. Cloud mode sends them to Firecrawl; self-hosted mode follows the operator's deployment and any configured model/provider dependencies.
Limitations
Tradeoffs
  • The hosted endpoint is easiest to connect and has the broadest feature set, but authorized design context passes through Figma and the connected AI workflow.
  • The desktop server is locally reachable through the Figma app, but it is intended for narrower organization and enterprise use cases.
  • Code Connect can improve component reuse but requires additional design-system setup.
  • Broad scrape, crawl, search, and autonomous-agent tools are powerful but enlarge prompt-injection, compliance, and cost exposure.
  • Cloud mode is easy to configure; self-hosting adds operational burden.
  • Remote URL forms that embed an API key are convenient but can leak through configuration, logs, screenshots, or history.
Risk contextPrivate designs can be disclosed through tool results, and write-enabled tools can change shared design files. Restrict accessible files, review OAuth consent, require confirmation for writes, and inspect downloaded assets before committing them.Main risks are prompt injection from untrusted pages, collection-policy violations, sensitive URL/query disclosure, API-key leakage, and agent-driven credit spend. Use URL allow-lists, low limits, human approval, and a dedicated low-budget key.
Evidence date
Editorial review2026-07-242026-07-24
Candidate evidence2026-07-29T20:58:26.000Z2026-08-14T18:46:26.000Z

Popularity, maintenance, fit, permissions, and client support are independent evidence fields.

Read the evidence method →
Compare MCPs | MCP100 Index