Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Emblematic

by dev.emblematic
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get design spec

get_design
Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this when you need the actual design values of one indexed site to build or restyle UI. Default returns the compact card (role colors with the site's own CSS variable names, fonts, type sizes, radius, container, caveats, links). Request more with sections (color, type, space, shape, depth, layout, motion, components, sections, stack, provenance) or "full" for the raw spec.json (large: ~15–20 KB). Not for search (use search_designs) or for a file to save in the project (use get_design_md).

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": {
      "site": "<site>"
    },
    "name": "get_design"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
siteYesIndexed site as a slug ("linear.app"), URL ("https://linear.app/pricing") or brand name ("Linear").
sectionsNoWhich parts to return. Default ["card"]. Ask only for what the task needs.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish this as a safe, idempotent, closed-world read. The description adds real behavioral context beyond them: the default response is the compact card, what the card contains (role colors with CSS variable names, fonts, type sizes, radius, container, caveats, links), and a cost warning that 'full' yields the raw spec.json at ~15-20 KB. It stops short of noting behavior for unindexed sites or any rate/pagination limits, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the trigger and followed by default behavior cost, then exclusions; nothing is wasted. The parenthetical enumeration of twelve section tokens is somewhat long but is the only place the option set is described in prose.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining returns and it does so: it enumerates the card's contents and characterizes the 'full' payload's format and size. For a two-parameter read tool, an agent has enough to choose this tool and call it correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description goes further by explaining what the section tokens mean in practice and, critically, that 'full' returns the large raw spec.json (~15-20 KB) rather than the summarized form. That cost/format distinction is meaning the schema's enum list alone does not convey.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb-plus-resource ('the actual design values of one indexed site') and scope ('build or restyle UI'), and explicitly contrasts itself with search_designs and get_design_md. An agent can distinguish it from every named sibling without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It gives a positive trigger ('when you need the actual design values... to build or restyle UI') and two explicit exclusions with substitutes: 'Not for search (use search_designs)' and 'not for a file to save in the project (use get_design_md)'. When-to-use, when-not-to-use, and alternatives are all present.

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

All Emblematic toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources