Skip to main content
Glama

Get icon SVG

get_icon
Read-only

Retrieves SVG markup for one icon identified by "prefix:name". Use this when the user requests the SVG for a selected icon. Returns the SVG markup or, for SVGs over 32 KB, its size and a URL.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "get_icon"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesIcon name as "prefix:name", e.g. "mdi:arrow-right"

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnly/non-destructive/closed-world, so safety is covered. The description adds the non-obvious behavioral detail that oversized SVGs (>32 KB) return size and a URL instead of markup, which an agent could not infer from any structured field. It stops short of describing error behavior for unknown icons.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, no filler. The identifier format and the primary use case are front-loaded before the return-value caveat.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a single-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers input format, the trigger condition, and the exact return shape including the large-file exception. Nothing an agent needs to call and interpret it is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and the schema already documents "prefix:name" with the mdi:arrow-right example. The description restates the same format without adding syntax, validation, or resolution rules (e.g. case sensitivity, collection prefix requirements). Baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource (retrieves SVG markup for one icon) plus the exact identifier format "prefix:name". An agent can distinguish this from search_icons (discovery) and find_brand_logo (brand-specific) without opening any schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly says to use it "when the user requests the SVG for a selected icon", which cleanly separates lookup-by-known-name from search. It does not name the alternatives (search_icons, find_brand_logo) or state what to do when the name is unknown, so not a full 5.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources