mcp

create_design_system

Destructive

Creates a new design system for a project. Use this tool when the user wants to set or update the overall visual theme, style, or branding of the application. This includes configuring:

Color Palette: Presets, custom primary colors, and saturation levels.
Typography: Font families (e.g., Inter, Roboto, etc.).
Shape: Corner roundness for UI elements.
Appearance: Light and dark mode background colors.
Design MD: Free-form design instructions in markdown. This tool establishes the foundational design tokens that apply across all screens in the project.

Instructions for Tool Call:

Call update_design_system tool immediately after this tool to apply the design system to the project, and display the design system in the UI.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`projectId`	No	Optional. The project ID to create design system for, example: '4044680601076201931', without the `projects/` prefix. If empty, creates a global asset (not associated with any project).
`designSystem`	Yes	Required. The design system to create.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	Identifier. The resource name of the asset. Format: assets/{asset}
`version`	No	Output only. The version of this asset. 0 indicates unversioned (legacy data). Incremented when the asset content changes.
`copiedFrom`	No	Optional. The resource name of the asset this was copied from, if any. Format: assets/{asset} Tracks the fork history of assets.
`designSystem`	No	Optional. The design system.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds valuable context: the tool establishes foundational design tokens that apply across all screens, and it requires a follow-up call to update_design_system to actually apply the system. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is well-structured with a clear purpose statement, a bulleted list of configuration areas, and a bolded instruction section. It is slightly verbose but every part earns its place, and the most important operational detail (call update_design_system after) is highlighted.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (nested DesignSystem object, many theme properties) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential user-facing behavior and the critical follow-up workflow. It does not need to explain return values, and parameter details are in the schema. Missing only a note about global vs. project-level creation, which is present in the schema.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description provides a high-level grouping of parameters (Color Palette, Typography, Shape, Appearance, Design MD) but does not add syntax, formats, or field-specific details beyond what the schema already documents. It's helpful for conceptual understanding but not necessary for correct invocation.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states 'Creates a new design system for a project' with a specific verb and resource. It lists the types of configuration (color, typography, shape, etc.), but does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like update_design_system or create_design_system_from_design_md, and the phrase 'set or update' could imply an update capability.

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?

The description explicitly says when to use it: 'when the user wants to set or update the overall visual theme, style, or branding of the application.' It also provides a crucial sequencing guideline: call update_design_system immediately after. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives like create_design_system_from_design_md.

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

All mcp tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but some pairs like create_design_system and create_design_system_from_design_md, or apply_design_system vs update_design_system, could cause confusion. Overall, agents can distinguish them with careful reading.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern, e.g., create_project, list_screens, upload_design_md. Even longer names like create_design_system_from_design_md maintain the pattern.

Tool Count5/5

With 14 tools, the server covers project, screen, and design system management without being overwhelming. The count is well-suited to the domain of a UI design platform.

Completeness3/5

While core operations exist, there are notable gaps: no delete tools for projects/screens/design systems, and no general update for projects or screens (edit_screens is text-prompt based). This can lead to dead ends for agents.

Resources

Need Help?