We're moving our wireframes off Figma and onto Paper, because Claude can change a Paper file directly through Paper's MCP server. The video is 2 minutes 57 seconds and shows one real fix.
What is Paper?
A design tool that does the same job as Figma.
If you've used Figma it'll feel familiar. The part I care about is the MCP server, which lets Claude read and edit the design file instead of me pushing rectangles around.
What did we wireframe with it?
Yak Farm, an internal software factory we're building for client work.
Every screen in the video was built by Claude through Paper's MCP. I didn't draw any of them.
How many layouts did Claude make?
Three, one per breakpoint, and the main panel works differently on each.
On desktop the chat and the preview sit side by side. On tablet the panel swipes away like a window. Mobile doesn't have room for both, so it's tabs and you pick chat or preview.
How do you fix something Claude got wrong?
Copy the element's link in Paper, paste it into Claude and say what's wrong.
The text entry area had too many stacked drop shadows and looked muddy. I cleared the old chat to give Claude a clean start. Then I pressed Cmd+L twice to copy the link for that exact element and typed "I'd like less stacked drop shadows near where the text entry is. It looks murky." My spelling was off and it didn't matter. In the video the cleaner version is on screen 18 seconds after I finish typing.
| What the video shows | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Breakpoints wireframed | 3 (desktop, tablet, mobile) | Video, 0:36 to 0:41 |
| Chats cleared before the fix | 1 | Video, 0:58 |
| Cmd+L presses to copy the element link | 2 | Video, 1:04 to 1:11 |
| Prompts for the shadow fix | 1 prompt, 15 words | Video, 1:13 to 1:23 |
| Video time from end of prompt to "so much cleaner" | 18 seconds (1:23 to 1:41) | Video timestamps. Whether the recording was cut in between is not measured |
| MCP tool calls Claude used for the fix | Not measured | Not shown in the video |
| Video length | 2 min 57 s | YouTube, read Oct 29, 2026 |
| Video published | Oct 15, 2026 | YouTube, read Oct 29, 2026 |
How does this compare with our old Figma wireframes?
The old way took about 3 weeks a round by my own rough count, and a wrong direction cost another 3.
A client would see the high fidelity version 3 weeks in, say it wasn't the direction they wanted, and we'd start again. With Paper a wrong direction is a prompt, like the shadow fix above. I haven't timed a full Yak Farm wireframe set yet, so that cell says not measured.
| Old Figma process | Paper and Claude | |
|---|---|---|
| Time to the first client review | 3 weeks (my rough figure, video 2:17 to 2:20) | Not measured |
| Cost of a wrong direction | Another 3 weeks (my rough figure, video 2:28 to 2:30) | 1 prompt for the fix shown (video 1:13 to 1:23) |
| Breakpoints in the first review | Not measured | 3 (video 0:36 to 0:41) |
What does Paper cost next to Figma?
Per editor it's a tie at $16 a month billed yearly. The gap is in MCP limits and how many seat types Figma has.
Paper has one paid seat. Figma has a Full, Dev and Collab seat on each of its 3 paid plans. The seat decides which products you get and how many MCP calls you can make. Everything below is copied from each company's own pricing and help pages, read Oct 30, 2026. "Not listed" means the page doesn't say.
| Plan and seat | Per month, billed yearly | Per month, billed monthly | MCP tool calls | AI credits included | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Paper Free, editor | $0 | $0 | 100 a week | Not listed ("Limited image generation") | Paper pricing |
| Paper Pro, editor | $16 | $20 | 1M a week | Not listed ("100x more image gen per week") | Paper pricing |
| Paper viewer, any plan | $0 | $0 | Not listed | Not listed | Paper pricing |
| Paper Organizations | Not listed ("contact us") | Not listed | Not listed | Not listed | Paper pricing |
| Figma Starter | $0 | $0 | 20 a month | 500 a month, 150 a day max | Figma pricing, MCP limits |
| Figma Professional, Full seat | $16 | $20 | 200 a day, 10 a minute | 3,000 a month | Figma pricing, MCP limits |
| Figma Professional, Dev seat | $12 | $15 | 200 a day, 10 a minute | 500 a month | Figma pricing, MCP limits |
| Figma Professional, Collab seat | $3 | $5 | 20 a month | 500 a month | Figma pricing, MCP limits |
| Figma Organization, Full seat | $55 | Not listed (billed annually) | 200 a day, 15 a minute | 3,500 a month | Figma pricing, MCP limits |
| Figma Organization, Dev seat | $25 | Not listed (billed annually) | 200 a day, 15 a minute | 500 a month | Figma pricing, MCP limits |
| Figma Organization, Collab seat | $5 | Not listed (billed annually) | 20 a month | 500 a month | Figma pricing, MCP limits |
| Figma Enterprise, Full seat | $90 | Not listed (billed annually) | 600 a day, 20 a minute | 4,250 a month | Figma pricing, MCP limits |
| Figma Enterprise, Dev seat | $35 | Not listed (billed annually) | 600 a day, 20 a minute | 500 a month | Figma pricing, MCP limits |
| Figma Enterprise, Collab seat | $5 | Not listed (billed annually) | 20 a month | 500 a month | Figma pricing, MCP limits |
| Figma viewer, paid plans (no seat to buy) | $0 | $0 | 20 a month | 500 a month, 150 a day max | Figma pricing, MCP limits, AI credits |
| Extra Figma AI credits | Not listed (shown in the admin dashboard) | Not listed | AI credit actions don't count toward MCP limits | Subscription or pay-as-you-go | AI credit FAQ |
Paper Pro also raises the max image size from 25 MB to 100 MB and adds video export.
Viewers are free on both, so a client can open the file without a seat. Here's a hypothetical, not our numbers: 5 editors and 10 viewers, billed yearly. That's 5 × $16 = $80 a month on Paper Pro, and 5 × $16 = $80 on Figma Professional with Full seats. Billed monthly it's 5 × $20 = $100 on each. On Figma Organization it's 5 × $55 = $275, and on Enterprise 5 × $90 = $450. The price matches at the bottom of the range. The MCP allowance doesn't. That's 1M calls a week per Paper Pro editor against 200 a day per Full seat on Figma Professional.
Why is a Figma bill hard to predict?
Because the seat, not the product, decides what you can do, and the AI and MCP parts sit on top.
Figma doesn't sell products one at a time. If someone needs Figma Make or Sites, they need a Full seat. A developer reading designs can get by on a Dev seat. Collab seats and viewers get 20 MCP calls a month, so anyone pointing Claude at Figma needs a Full or Dev seat. If the agent writes to files outside their drafts, Figma's help center says that takes a Full seat. The same page says the MCP server is free during the beta and "will eventually become a usage-based paid feature", with no price given yet.
AI credits are per person and don't roll over. Extra credits come from a subscription pool or pay-as-you-go, and Figma only shows those prices inside the admin dashboard. Its help page also says it "can't predict exactly how many credits" a Make or agent prompt will use before it runs. On Professional, seats added partway through an annual plan are billed as a separate monthly subscription at the monthly price until you move them onto the annual one.
| What you need in Figma | Full seat | Dev seat | Collab seat | Viewer on a paid plan |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Edit in Figma Design | Yes | No, view and comment | No, view and comment | No, view and comment |
| Figma Make, Draw, Motion (beta), Sites (beta) | Yes | Not included | Not included | Not listed |
| Dev Mode | Yes | Yes | Basic inspection | Basic inspection |
| FigJam, Slides | Yes | Yes | Yes | Not listed |
| Specs (beta), Buzz (beta) | Yes | Yes | Yes | Listed as "available on all seats" |
| MCP above 20 calls a month | Yes | Yes | No | No |
| MCP writing to files outside your drafts | Yes | No | No | No |
Sources for this table: Figma pricing seat FAQ and seat product lists, Figma MCP limits and Get started with the Figma MCP server, all read Oct 30, 2026.
Paper's version fits in one line: you pay per editor on Pro, and viewers never pay. I haven't counted how many tool calls a full wireframe set burns through, so I can't say yet whether the free plan covers it.
Are we done with Figma?
Not yet. Wireframes are moving first.
Transcript
Cleaned up from the video's auto captions. Filler words removed, wording otherwise kept.
I can finally talk about Paper. If you haven't seen it, it's an alternative to something like Figma, and if you're used to Figma it should feel right at home. Let me tell you why I love it and why we're trying to ditch Figma.
This is a wireframe for an upcoming internal project of ours. We're calling it Yak Farm, and it's an internal software factory that we build for clients. The interesting thing is that every single wireframe you're looking at here has been vibe coded, or built agentically. It's using the MCP, and you can see we have the desktop version, the tablet version and the mobile version.
Now I want to show you what Paper does really well. Looking through these, the first thing I notice is there's an especially large amount of drop shadows. So I'll tell Claude. This is from an earlier chat, so I'll start by clearing it to give it the best chance. I go to the Paper file and press Cmd+L, which copies a link to the clipboard. I want this one specifically, so I press Cmd+L again, and I say "I'd like less stacked drop shadows near where the text entry is. It looks murky."
That's the beauty of AI. You don't have to think too much about the spelling. This bit is what I have the problem with. It's the stacked drop shadows I'm not the biggest fan of. And there we go, I think that looks so much cleaner immediately.
This is done in different ways per screen. This panel is a left and right panel on desktop. On tablet we need to provide the best experience for tablet, so this one feels right at home if you swipe it away like you would a window. On mobile there's not much screen real estate, so it makes sense to have a tabbed layout where you can see the chat or the preview.
It brings more focus to the user experience and how people actually test their applications. In the old days you'd do a high fidelity wireframe and it took you 3 weeks or whatever. The client would see it 3 weeks later and say "this isn't the direction I want to go." Then it's back to the drawing board, another 3 weeks, you get the idea.
I can see this being a very good pattern in the future, and I thought this would be a nice insight into how we've been building things for clients.
I'm Jono. I run Roboto Studio. Next.js and Sanity mostly, nearly all of it on Vercel. If you're wireframing with Claude and an MCP server, I'd love to hear what you're building.
Top comments (0)