Figma: the 360 agent-readiness check
Figma scores 73 of 100 on Ora's agent-readiness scan, a B, read 9 November 2026. Of the five surfaces an agent acts on, Ora found 3: a public API, OAuth, a command line. An MCP server with no schema of any kind beside it.
On 9 November 2026 the public site at figma.com scored 73 of 100 on Ora's agent-readiness scan, a B, in Ora's Productivity category. Ora probes a site the way an agent would: it requests pages with the agents' own user agents, reads robots.txt, looks for the files agents read, and tries the API, MCP and payment surfaces. This check reads the act layer first, because that is what the directory records, then the door, what an agent can read, and whether the company is found and recommended. Ora's one-line summary: Figma offers a solid npm SDK, ChatGPT app listing, and a clean robots.txt, but lacks a published OpenAPI spec for agents to discover its endpoints.
The score
| Layer | Asks | Points | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Usability | Can agents use it | 53 of 71 | 75% |
| Access | Can agents read it | 39 of 58 | 67% |
| Discovery | Can agents find and recommend it | 14 of 18 | 78% |
| Payments | Can agents pay | 0 of 0 | none apply |
| Total | Grade B | 73 of 100 | 73% |
What an agent can do
The surfaces an agent acts on: an API it can find and call, an MCP server, an agent card, OAuth metadata, a command line. This is the layer the directory records, so it comes first. 2 checks in this group do not apply to this site and are left out.
In the directory, Figma sign-in required, tools not seen, not counted; the connector run of 4 November 2026 is on the entry page. Ora's MCP server check for the same domain reads partial; the two look for different things, the directory for a server that answers a handshake and lists tools, Ora for a server it can find from the site.
| Check | Result | Points | What Ora saw |
|---|---|---|---|
| MCP server / manifest mcp-server | Partial | 5 of 6 | MCP server detected at https://mcp.figma.com/mcp; it requires authentication. Presence is verified (5/6), but Ora could not inspect its tools or verify access scopes without credentials. |
| MCP well-known discovery mcp-well-known-discovery | Partial | 1 of 2 | MCP server at https://mcp.figma.com/mcp - list its server card, hosted on your own domain, in /.well-known/ai-catalog.json so MCP clients can discover it |
| Public API with reachable endpoints public-api | Pass | 7 of 7 | REST API documentation found at /api. Best-of-protocols score: 7/7. |
| Public API/docs linked from homepage public-api-docs | Pass | 3 of 3 | Documentation site found at https://developers.figma.com |
| Developer portal developer-portal | Pass | 6 of 6 | Developer portal found at /developers |
| OpenAPI spec published openapi-spec | Fail | 0 of 7 | No OpenAPI/Swagger specification found |
| API catalog (RFC 9727) api-catalog-rfc9727 | Fail | 0 of 2 | No /.well-known/api-catalog found (RFC 9727) |
| A2A / agent-card a2a-agent-card | Fail | 0 of 2 | No A2A agent card found at /.well-known/agent-card.json |
| Agent discovery file agent-discovery-file | Fail | 0 of 2 | No agent discovery file found |
| OAuth 2.0 support oauth-support | Pass | 5 of 5 | OAuth authorization server metadata at https://api.figma.com |
| OAuth Protected Resource metadata (RFC 9728) oauth-protected-resource | Pass | 2 of 2 | no detail published |
| auth.md exists auth-md-exists | Fail | 0 of 2 | No /auth.md found at site root |
| WebMCP support webmcp | Fail | 0 of 5 | No WebMCP support detected - no document.modelContext / navigator.modelContext usage found (scanned 28 of 28 same-origin script bundle(s) for modelContext registrations) |
| NLWeb /ask endpoint nlweb-ask | Pass | 1 of 1 | NLWeb /ask endpoint exists but requires authentication (HTTP 403, via POST) |
| CLI tool available cli-tool | Pass | 3 of 3 | CLI package found on npm: @figma/code-connect |
| Multi-language SDK packages rest-sdk-packages | Partial | 1 of 3 | SDK package found only in npm |
| JSON error responses json-error-responses | Pass | 4 of 4 | no detail published |
At the door
What the site answers when a request arrives with an agent's user agent, and what robots.txt says to agents.
| Check | Result | Points | What Ora saw |
|---|---|---|---|
| Not blocked by bot detection bot-detection | Pass | 2 of 2 | Site accessible to 4 agent user-agents (ChatGPT-User, OAI-SearchBot, Claude-User, PerplexityBot). |
| Agent crawler reachability agent-crawler-reachability | Pass | 2 of 2 | Reachable to every agent we tested - ChatGPT-User: reachable, OAI-SearchBot: reachable, Claude-User: reachable, PerplexityBot: reachable |
| robots.txt AI crawler policy robots-ai-policy-quality | Pass | 2 of 2 | AI search crawlers: allowed in 3 of 3 checks (3 crawlers on 1 page). AI training crawlers: allowed in 0 of 2 checks (2 crawlers on 1 page), not scored. |
| robots.txt agent-user policy robots-agent-user-policy | Pass | 2 of 2 | No applicable crawl or usage restriction found for 3 user-triggered agents (chatgpt-user, claude-user, perplexity-user) on 1 public page: https://figma.com/. Declared policy only; |
| Content behind auth docs-auth-gate | Pass | 2 of 2 | All 5 sampled pages are publicly readable (5 with substantive content) |
| Homepage not hidden from search noindex-directives | Pass | 1 of 1 | No noindex on the homepage: no robots, googlebot or bingbot meta tag and no X-Robots-Tag header hides it from search. |
| Redirect hygiene redirect-hygiene | Pass | 1 of 1 | no detail published |
| Web Bot Auth directory web-bot-auth-directory | Fail | 0 of 2 | No /.well-known/http-message-signatures-directory found |
What an agent can read
Whether the text is in the first response, what the site publishes for agents, and how it describes itself to them. One check in this group does not apply to this site and is left out.
| Check | Result | Points | What Ora saw |
|---|---|---|---|
| Content without JavaScript content-no-js | Partial | 2 of 3 | Homepage: 1695 chars with H1, but 1.9% content ratio is below the 5% target. No inner pages checked: the 5 sampled pages were skipped (forms, login pages, bot challenges, error pages, |
| Page token budget page-token-budget | Pass | 1 of 1 | All 6 measured pages fit an agent context budget (largest ~2K tokens) |
| Sitemap exists sitemap | Pass | 2 of 2 | Valid sitemap found at https://www.figma.com/sitemap.xml with multiple sitemaps entries |
| Sitemap freshness (lastmod) sitemap-lastmod | Pass | 1 of 1 | no detail published |
| llms.txt exists llms-txt-exists | Pass | 1 of 1 | Found the llms.txt at https://developers.figma.com/llms.txt. |
| llms.txt formatting llms-txt-formatting | Pass | 2 of 2 | The llms.txt is well-formatted: 123 lines with markdown links, 16,430 characters in total. |
| Markdown agent docs markdown-negotiation | Fail | 0 of 1 | Missing markdown content negotiation. Homepage returned text/html when probed with Accept: text/markdown (expected text/markdown), and none of the well-known root paths (/llms.md, /auth.md, /agents.md, /developers.md, |
| Markdown URL fallback markdown-url-fallback | Fail | 0 of 2 | Homepage does not support the .md suffix. Probed https://figma.com/index.md and it did not return markdown (expected text/markdown content-type or a heading-led non-HTML body). |
| Bot-UA markdown serving agent-ua-markdown | Fail | 0 of 1 | No probed bot User-Agent (ChatGPT-User, Claude-User, Perplexity-User) receives markdown when requesting HTML. Optional: detect AI-bot UAs server-side and serve them a markdown representation directly. |
| Agent mode view agent-mode-view | Fail | 0 of 2 | ?mode=agent returns same content as homepage (no dedicated agent view) |
| JSON-LD structured data json-ld | Partial | 2 of 4 | JSON-LD Organization found - missing description on this entity |
| Organization schema completeness org-schema-completeness | Partial | 1 of 2 | Organization schema found but missing: address |
| JSON-LD entity linking (sameAs) json-ld-entity-linking | Partial | 1 of 2 | Entity linking to linkedin.com - add more authority profiles (Wikipedia, Wikidata, LinkedIn, GitHub) |
| Schema type breadth schema-type-breadth | Fail | 0 of 2 | No extended schema types found - AI can only answer basic questions about this entity |
| Metadata completeness metadata-completeness | Pass | 2 of 2 | All metadata signals present: canonical URL, lang="en", og:image, og:type |
| Agent instruction / when-to-use agent-instruction | Fail | 0 of 3 | No agent instruction file with when-to-use guidance found |
Found and recommended
Whether an assistant can find the company by name, confirm what it is, and see it in the registries agents read.
| Check | Result | Points | What Ora saw |
|---|---|---|---|
| Brand name discoverability brand-search-accuracy | Partial | 2 of 3 | figma.com ranks #6 for "Figma" and appears 4 times in the top 10 (searched your brand name alone: no main product term from your homepage qualified) |
| Wikipedia / Wikidata entity presence wikipedia-presence | Pass | 4 of 4 | Wikipedia "Figma" and Wikidata Q96186334 both verified - domain confirmed on both sources |
| Developer resource discoverability agentic-search-specific | Partial | 2 of 3 | In a search for your API docs, your docs came up at #2 (https://developers.figma.com/docs/plugins/api/api-reference). In a search for your MCP server, SDK or CLI, none of the 10 results is your own, although the scan found one on your site |
| Listed in MCP registries mcp-registry-listed | Fail | 0 of 1 | No verified entry in the official MCP Registry or on Smithery, and no npm or PyPI package of yours that runs as an MCP server. To pass, |
| NPM/PyPI SDK package npm-sdk-package | Pass | 1 of 1 | no detail published |
| ChatGPT app listed chatgpt-app-listed | Pass | 2 of 2 | no detail published |
| Registry branding registry-branding | Fail | 0 of 2 | No registry branding (name, icon, description) found |
| Listed on skills.sh skills-sh-listed | Pass | 1 of 1 | no detail published |
| ARD discovery ard-catalog | Fail | 0 of 1 | No /.well-known/ard.json, no same-site rel="ard" link, and no legacy /.well-known/ai-catalog.json |
Payments
The agent payment protocols Ora probes for. A site that sells nothing has nothing here, and Ora scores the layer out of zero when none applies. None of the 6 payment checks applied to figma.com.
The fixes worth most points
Ora attaches an estimate to each failing or partial check: how many points the site would gain by passing it. These are the 5 with the largest estimates for Figma, with what Ora observed. The wording of each fix is Ora's; the 28 checks it runs on an MCP server are listed with their layer and tier.
- OpenAPI spec published: fail, 0 of 7, about 4 points to gain. Ora saw: No OpenAPI/Swagger specification found
- Scoped permissions: fail, 0 of 5, about 3.1 points to gain. Ora saw: No declared OAuth scopes, security schemes, or scoped-permission documentation found
- WebMCP support: fail, 0 of 5, about 3.1 points to gain. Ora saw: No WebMCP support detected - no document.modelContext / navigator.modelContext usage found (scanned 28 of 28 same-origin script bundle(s) for modelContext registrations)
- Agent instruction / when-to-use: fail, 0 of 3, about 1.7 points to gain. Ora saw: No agent instruction file with when-to-use guidance found
- API schema complexity analysis: fail, 0 of 2, about 1.3 points to gain. Ora saw: No API schema detected
Our read
Figma has the server and not the schema. The MCP server at mcp.figma.com/mcp answers and requires authentication, OAuth authorization server metadata is at api.figma.com, the REST documentation scores 7 of 7, @figma/code-connect is on npm and developers.figma.com carries an llms.txt. What an agent cannot find is any machine-readable description of the API: no OpenAPI specification, no API schema of any kind and no declared scopes, which together are about 8 points, and none of the 28 script bundles registers a WebMCP tool. The reading side is thin in a way that suits a design tool whose product lives behind a login, 1,695 characters at a 1.9 percent text ratio and no inner pages that could be sampled, with an Organization block that lacks its description. The brand search finds figma.com four times in the top ten and sixth at best. The specification is the one file that would move the B.
Test your own surfaces
The scan above is free and needs no account: enter a domain at ora.ai and read the same four layers for your own site. For an MCP server, Ora scans the server URL itself and runs 28 of its 132 public checks on it, which is why it is the check this directory recommends; the reasons, the limits and the alternatives are on their own page. The command below runs the same audit from a terminal and exits with 1 under the score you set, so it can gate a deploy.
npx ax@0.10 audit https://example.com --min-score 70All 360 checks, one company a day. Corrections to the corrections page.