The release needs a working design-to-code path, while security needs an access boundary it can defend.
Code Layers must reach the customer’s release workflow without turning a limited MCP test into unreviewed repository access.
Who you’d be doing this for
“My release leads need the components this month, and security keeps asking what the agent can actually touch.”
Ragnar Nyman · Design Systems Engineering Manager
Leads the customer team responsible for keeping the component library aligned with production code.
What is at stake
The customer has 21 days to approve 30 component changes without unapproved repository access. You must weigh a faster release path against an access model the customer can audit and keep running.
Why it isn’t already fixed
Every obvious fix costs something else. That’s the part you’d have to decide.
- release deadline vs. audit-ready access
- generated code speed vs. CI verification
- customer-specific fit vs. reusable deployment pattern
- engineering continuity vs. security approval
Why Figma
Make Local, Code Layers, and MCP only earn durable enterprise adoption when they work inside a customer’s actual security and CI constraints.
Written with these in mind
Not your kind of problem? 45 more at Figma, or browse every organization.
This is the setup. The work is inside.
Running it puts you in the room: the full situation and its constraints, stakeholders who push back in their own words, and the decisions that are yours to make. What you produce becomes a Day One Plan — work you can show someone instead of describing.