Figma Make vs Google Stitch vs Claude Design: prompt-to-UI compared
Figma Make, Google Stitch and Claude Design all turn prompts into interfaces, but they fit different workflows. Figma Make builds working React prototypes inside Figma and can use your design system through Make kits. Google Stitch, updated in March 2026 with an infinite canvas, a design agent and an MCP server, generates multi-screen UI and exports code to many formats. Claude Design creates prototypes, decks and pages from conversation inside Claude. Choose by where your team already works.
How do the three tools compare?
| Figma Make | Google Stitch | Claude Design | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Made by | Figma | Anthropic | |
| Lives in | Figma | Its own canvas, linked to Google’s AI tools | The Claude app |
| Typical output | Working React prototypes | Multi-screen UI designs and code | Prototypes, wireframes, decks, one-pagers |
| Design system | Make kits with your components | Design rules and style guidance | Attached guidelines and code |
| Code and export | React code, publish, copy to Figma Design | HTML, CSS, Tailwind and more; Figma export | PPTX, PDF, HTML, Canva; hand off to Claude Code |
| Coding-agent link | Figma MCP server | Stitch MCP server | Hand-off to Claude Code |
Details come from our guides to Figma Make and Claude Design, and from coverage of Stitch’s March 2026 update, which added an infinite canvas, voice input, a design agent and MCP integration, as reported on Medium. Features change quickly; check each product before deciding.
When is Figma Make the best choice?
If your design system and team already live in Figma, Make keeps everything in one place. Make kits bring your real components, styles and guidelines into generated prototypes, and results can be copied back into Figma Design. With the Figma MCP server, coding agents can then read the same files. It suits product teams who need prototypes that look and behave like their real product.
When is Google Stitch the best choice?
Stitch generates several connected screens quickly and exports code in many formats, including HTML, CSS and Tailwind. Its MCP server lets coding agents such as Claude Code, Cursor and Gemini CLI request UI generation from inside the editor. It suits developers and small teams who want to move from idea to coded interface quickly, especially those already using Google’s AI tools. It is less mature than Figma for detailed design systems and team collaboration.
When is Claude Design the best choice?
Claude Design works from conversation and handles more than screens: prototypes, decks, one-pagers and landing pages. It suits founders, product managers and designers who want quick visual drafts and stakeholder material, and teams that already use Claude for writing and research. Designs can be handed to Claude Code to build.
How should you compare them?
- Write one realistic brief: Describe users, screens, content and key actions.
- Generate in each tool: Use the same brief and time limit.
- Apply your design system: See how well each respects your components and styles.
- Check the code: Export and review structure and accessibility.
- Ask users: Show prototypes to a few users and compare reactions.
What do none of them replace?
- User research and testing
- Decisions about information architecture and content
- Accessibility review
- Detailed interaction design for complex flows
- Design system governance
These tools make the first draft fast; the craft of making it right still belongs to designers. See how designers can ship real products with AI.
What does a real comparison show?
A product designer at a fitness start-up gives all three tools the same brief: a class-booking flow with search, class details, booking and confirmation. Stitch produces five linked screens in minutes, with code to match, which is great for discussing options. Claude Design produces a clean prototype and a short stakeholder deck explaining the flow. Figma Make, using the team’s Make kit, produces a working prototype in the start-up’s real components, ready for usability testing. The team explores in Stitch and Claude Design, then builds the tested version in Figma Make, keeping Figma as the source of truth.
What do they cost?
Figma Make runs on Figma’s AI credits, included in seats at different levels. Claude Design uses your Claude plan’s limits. Stitch has offered generous free access while Google develops it, with API access for agents. Because terms change often, check each product’s current plans, and estimate costs from real usage during a short pilot rather than headline prices.
Whichever you choose, keep one source of truth for your design system, and treat AI output as a fast first draft to be refined, tested and reviewed.
Re-test the tools every few months; all three are changing fast.
Start with the one closest to your workflow.
How UIUX Studio helps
We help design teams choose and combine AI design tools without losing quality or consistency. Talk to our product design team.
Frequently asked questions
Which is best: Figma Make, Stitch or Claude Design?
It depends on where your team works: Figma teams often prefer Make, developers Stitch, Claude users Claude Design.
Does Google Stitch replace Figma?
Not for most teams; it speeds up first drafts, while Figma remains stronger for design systems and collaboration.
Can these tools use my design system?
Figma Make via Make kits; Stitch and Claude Design via guidelines and examples.
Do they export code?
Yes: Make exports React, Stitch exports several formats, Claude Design hands off to Claude Code.
Are they free?
Each has different access and limits; check current plans.