Skip to main content
Wessel_Bronswijk
New Member
October 1, 2026
Question

Add Mistral (Vibe) to the Figma MCP Catalog allowlist

  • October 1, 2026
  • 0 replies
  • 13 views

Summary
I'd like Mistral's MCP client to be added to the Figma MCP Catalog so that Mistral users can connect to the official remote Figma MCP server (https://mcp.figma.com/mcp).

The problem
Mistral's Le Chat, now part of Mistral Vibe (Vibe Work), supports custom MCP connectors. These connect to remote servers over Streamable HTTP and support OAuth 2.1 with dynamic client registration. When I add https://mcp.figma.com/mcp as a custom connector, [describe what happened, e.g. the connection fails with "MCP connection requires additional information or is invalid" / HTTP 403 during registration].

From the forum thread "Figma's approach breaks the core promise of MCP", I understand the remote server allowlists client_name during dynamic client registration, and that only clients in the MCP Catalog can currently authenticate. Mistral's client doesn't appear to be on that list.

Why it matters
- Mistral is a major AI provider with a large user base, particularly in Europe, where many teams choose it for data-residency and compliance reasons.
- Today, Mistral users have to run self-hosted community servers (such as Framelink) with personal access tokens. These offer read-only design data and none of the official server's features: Code Connect, design system rules, and canvas writes.
- Designers and developers using Mistral can't get the same design-to-code workflow as users of Claude Code, Cursor, VS Code, or Codex.
- Mistral's connectors include admin controls and per-function permission toggles (read vs. write), which fit the way Figma's own docs recommend handling write access.

What I'm asking for
1. Add Mistral's MCP client (Le Chat / Vibe Work) to the Figma MCP Catalog allowlist.
2. If that isn't possible yet, please share the process and requirements for a client to be approved, and whether new client approvals are currently open.
3. Longer term, consider supporting an open registration method (for example, client ID metadata documents) so that compliant clients don't each need individual approval.

 

Thank you for considering this. Happy to test any fix on my account.