Get a component by slug. Free components return installable source. With an agent key (Authorization: Bearer azr_…), paid components the account owns and Pro components covered by an active membership return source too. Otherwise returns how to buy (see the purchase tool).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | The component slug |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It transparently states the auth requirement (Bearer azr_…), conditional returns for free/owned/pro components, and the fallback to purchase info, covering all key behaviors.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and packs auth, conditions, and alternatives without redundancy. Every sentence earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the lack of an output schema, the description adequately explains return values (source vs how to buy) and access conditions. For a simple one-parameter retrieval tool, it is complete and contextual.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema already describes the slug parameter with 100% coverage. The description merely repeats 'slug' without adding extra semantic detail, fitting the baseline for full schema coverage.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses the specific verb 'Get' with resource 'component by slug', clearly distinguishing it from search/install tools. It further clarifies scope by stating which components return source and references the purchase tool for others.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
It explicitly outlines conditions for source access (free vs paid/pro with agent key) and directs users to the purchase tool for non-source cases. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use search or inspect instead, so it falls short of full guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but there is some overlap: search and search_components both find products (one whole marketplace, one UI components only), and get_component and inspect both retrieve product information (one for source, one for manifest). These are distinguishable by their descriptions and use cases.
The tools follow a mostly consistent verb-based pattern with snake_case (check_purchase, get_component, search_components), but three tools are single verbs without an object (inspect, install, purchase). This is a minor deviation from the verb_noun convention used by the others.
Seven tools is well-scoped for a marketplace server. Each tool covers a necessary step in the workflow (search, evaluate, purchase, install) without bloat, and there are no redundant utilities.
The tool set covers the full marketplace lifecycle: discovery (search, search_components), evaluation (inspect, get_component), acquisition (purchase, check_purchase), and installation (install). The flow from search to install is seamless, with no obvious dead ends or missing critical operations.