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

Figma MCP BridgeFigma MCP

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

Comparable alternatives

Azure MCP ServerMCP100 RecommendedChrome DevTools MCPMCP100 RecommendedContext7 MCPMCP100 RecommendedGrafana Cloud MCPMCP100 RecommendedGoogle MCP Toolbox for DatabasesMCP100 RecommendedGoogle Search Console MCP Server for SEOsMCP100 Recommended

Shown only when capability or industry context overlaps.

Side-by-side MCP evidence comparison
Evidence field	Figma MCP BridgeShortlist candidate	Figma MCPMCP100 Recommended
Task fit
Best for	Inspecting and operating the publisher-documented Figma bridge during design-to-code or design-automation work	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
Not ideal for	Replacing designer review or guaranteeing production-ready code and pixel accuracy from arbitrary Figma files	MCP clients outside Figma's supported catalog Teams expecting one-click pixel-perfect production code Headless automation that cannot complete user OAuth
Avoid when	The connected Figma file contains confidential designs, comments, assets, or data that must not reach the MCP client	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
Provenance
Provenance details	Community implementation github:gethopp · Publisher source ↗	First-party MCP Figma · Publisher source ↗
Maintenance
Maintenance details	Repo: Aug 10, 2026 Package: Not documented	Repo: Not documented Package: Not documented
Popularity evidence
GitHub stars	484 GitHub stars · checked 2026-08-14T18:46:26.000Z	Not documented
Client coverage
Client coverage details	Claude Code✓ Local stdio Claude Desktop✓ Local stdio Codex✓ Local stdio VS Code✓ Local stdio Cursor✓ Local stdio OpenCode✓ Local stdio	Claude Code✓ Streamable HTTP Claude Desktop✓ Streamable HTTP Codex✓ Streamable HTTP VS Code✓ Streamable HTTP Cursor✓ Streamable HTTP OpenCode✓ Streamable HTTP
Client coverage note	Local stdio runs on your computer. Streamable HTTP connects to a remotely hosted MCP server.
Access and data
Authentication	MCP authentication or tokens are not documented. The current Figma user must have permission to edit the target file for writes.	The 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.
Cost	The MIT-licensed project documents npx installation and lists no MCP usage fee. Figma plan, client, and model costs are separate.	Figma 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.
Permissions	Reads connected Figma files, documents, selections, styles, variables, metadata, and screenshots. Opt-in tools can edit text and properties, create or delete nodes, reparent content, and save screenshots locally; writes require Figma edit permission.	The connected user's Figma identity and existing file permissions govern access. The current remote MCP is not purely read-only: Write to Canvas can create or modify design content for users or seats with required edit authority, while read-only design-context workflows remain available without edit authority.
Data handling	Streams live Figma document data from the plugin to the AI client through the local bridge; screenshots can be returned or saved locally. Telemetry, retention, and model-training behavior are not documented.	The 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.
Limitations
Tradeoffs	Live design context reduces screenshot guesswork, while the bridge and Figma-side setup add moving parts and expose document content to the agent.	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.
Risk context	Read tools can expose private designs and write tools can modify or delete shared files. Keep the unauthenticated local WebSocket and HTTP bridge restricted and require confirmation for writes.	Private 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.
Evidence date
Editorial review	2026-08-11	2026-07-24
Candidate evidence	2026-08-14T18:46:26.000Z	2026-09-24T04:25:05.554391Z

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

Read the evidence method →