Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Vadivam Icons

by io.github.praveenjuge
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Suggest icons for a UI

suggest_icons
Read-onlyIdempotent

Suggest icons for each thing a UI description mentions, such as "settings sidebar with search, profile, and logout". Splits on commas and words like "and" or "with", then ranks icons per concept. Pick one per concept, then call get_icon.

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": {
      "description": "<description>"
    },
    "name": "suggest_icons"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
perConceptNoCandidates per concept (default 3, max 10).
descriptionYesA short description of the screen, feature, or list of actions that need icons.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
conceptsYes
unmatchedYes
descriptionYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral detail beyond that: how the input string is tokenized (commas, "and", "with") and that results are ranked sets of candidates per concept rather than a single answer.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then mechanism, then next action. The example is short and illustrative rather than filler; nothing is repeated from the title or annotations.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be described, and the parsing/ranking behavior plus the workflow handoff to get_icon cover the essentials. It stops short of noting constraints such as the 500-character input limit or what happens when a concept yields no good match.

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 baseline would be 3, but the description adds meaning the schema does not: it explains how the free-text `description` string is parsed into concepts, which is the key semantic an agent needs to write a good value. `perConcept` semantics remain solely in the schema.

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 ("suggest icons") plus the input unit ("each thing a UI description mentions") and gives a concrete example prompt. It also distinguishes itself from the downstream sibling by framing the output as candidates that must be picked from before calling get_icon.

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?

Provides explicit next-step guidance: "Pick one per concept, then call get_icon," which routes the agent through the intended workflow. It does not cover when to prefer search_icons or list_categories instead, so the alternative-selection guidance is incomplete.

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

All Vadivam Icons toolsInspect
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.

Resources