Compose Preview Catalogs

ui_builder_acknowledge_comment

Say that you have read a comment thread — which is not the same as resolving it. Resolving claims the question is settled; acknowledging claims only that you have seen it, which is the honest thing to say while you are still working on what it asked for. Omit threadId to acknowledge the whole discussion, which is what you mean after reading it with ui_builder_list_comments. Acknowledgement is per actor, so a thread you have read is still waiting for the other people in the design, and it is what clears the comments block the server puts on your ui_builder_apply, ui_builder_get_design, ui_builder_export and ui_builder_put_asset replies.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`token`	No	A grant token from poll_access, when you cannot set the X-Compose-Preview-Token header yourself — an MCP client fixes its headers at connect time, so this is how a token approved during this session is used in it. Prefer the header where you control it.
`designId`	Yes
`threadId`	No	One thread. Omit for every thread on the design.
`agentName`	No	Optional agent/client name shown to design viewers; self-reported.
`agentModel`	No	Optional current model name shown to design viewers; self-reported. Omit when unknown.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 4, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / agentModel

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional current model name shown to design viewers; self-reported. Omit when unknown.",
+  "maxLength": 80,
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / agentName

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional agent/client name shown to design viewers; self-reported.",
+  "maxLength": 80,
+  "type": "string"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedSep 30, 2026
- changedOutput schema / (root)
```
Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "type": "object"
+}
```
First observedSep 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that acknowledgement is per-actor, that it is non-destructive relative to resolving, and that it clears the `comments` block on ui_builder_apply, ui_builder_get_design, ui_builder_export and ui_builder_put_asset replies. What it omits is auth/permission requirements and error or idempotency behavior, so it falls just short of a 5.

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 key distinction from resolving is front-loaded in the first clause, which is exactly right. It is a little long and rhetorical ('which is the honest thing to say'), but every sentence carries a distinct fact rather than padding.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description instead supplies the cross-tool side effect (clearing the comments block) that an agent could not infer from schema or annotations. Given five parameters and no annotations, nothing essential is missing.

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 80%, so the baseline is 3. The description's only parameter guidance is the threadId omission rule, which the schema already states ('Omit for every thread on the design'), so it adds little. The token, agentName and agentModel parameters are left entirely to 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 (acknowledge) and resource (a comment thread), and immediately draws the boundary against the sibling operation that is easiest to confuse it with: resolving. An agent can distinguish this from ui_builder_resolve_comment_thread and ui_builder_react_to_comment without opening any 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?

Explicit when-to-use: acknowledge while still working on the request, after reading the thread with ui_builder_list_comments. Explicit when-not-to-use: resolving, which 'claims the question is settled.' It also gives the scoping rule for omitting threadId.

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

All Compose Preview Catalogs tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.