Candor UI docs

A brief for a coding agent

get_brief

Read-onlyIdempotent

One item's brief to hand to the coding agent that builds the screen: the same Markdown the docs page's "Copy for a coding agent" button copies (what the item is, its tier and install command, an example with the import paths an app uses, every prop, the string keys, and the rules to keep).

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_brief"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	The registry name, e.g. "thread" or "approval-request".
`version`	No	A release, e.g. "2.6.2": the page as that release published it, for a project that has that version installed. Default: the version the server's URL passes (`?kit=`, which `npx candor-ui mcp` writes from candor-lock.json), else the current docs. When that release's docs weren't kept, or the page isn't in them, the answer is the current page with a note saying so.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 10, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / version

Added value: +{
+  "description": "A release, e.g. \"2.6.2\": the page as that release published it, for a project that has that version installed. Default: the version the server's URL passes (`?kit=`, which `npx candor-ui mcp` writes from candor-lock.json), else the current docs. When that release's docs weren't kept, or the page isn't in them, the answer is the current page with a note saying so.",
+  "maxLength": 32,
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedNov 8, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully discloses the return payload's composition, but with no output schema this is the only place return shape can live, and it stops short of stating size, formatting guarantees, or whether the brief is deterministic per name+version.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

A single sentence, well front-loaded with the artifact and its consumer, but the parenthetical inventory runs long and nests clauses. It is dense rather than wasteful, yet the enumeration could have been a short list for faster scanning.

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?

For a two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the main gap by enumerating what the returned Markdown contains. What is missing is only routing guidance against sibling docs tools, which is a minor omission given how precisely the payload is described.

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% and the version parameter's fallback chain (kit query param, then current docs, then a note) is fully documented in the schema itself. The description adds nothing about name or version semantics, so 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 ('one item's brief to hand to the coding agent') and pins the exact artifact: the same Markdown the docs page's 'Copy for a coding agent' button produces. The content enumeration (tier, install command, example, import paths, props, string keys, rules) makes it unmistakable versus get_component_docs or get_started.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by the phrase 'to hand to the coding agent that builds the screen', which signals the build-a-screen workflow, but the description never says when to choose this over get_component_docs or get_design, nor any prerequisites. The reader must infer the alternative from context rather than from stated routing.

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

All Candor UI docs tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.