Skip to main content
Glama

EneUI Catalogue

search_components

Search the EneUI catalog of React/Tailwind/shadcn components. Returns matching components with their page URL and the one-line shadcn install command.

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "search_components"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoHow many results (default 10).
queryYesFree text: 'pricing table', 'modal with focus trap', 'animated hero'.
libraryNoOptional library id, e.g. keyline, aceternity, icons-lucide.
categoryNoOptional category slug, e.g. button, modal, pricing.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It does useful work by disclosing the return payload (page URL plus the one-line shadcn install command), but says nothing about search behavior (fuzzy vs. exact), max result semantics, or any access constraints.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler, with the resource scope front-loaded and the return contract immediately after. Nothing could be cut without losing information.

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?

The tool is simple, has no output schema, and the description compensates by stating what a result contains. Without annotations, a note on permissions or result ordering would round it out, but nothing essential to invoking it correctly 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 100%, so the schema already documents query, library, category, and limit with examples. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb and resource ("Search the EneUI catalog of React/Tailwind/shadcn components") and states the return shape. It implicitly separates itself from search_blocks by scoping to components, but never explicitly distinguishes the two.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, and no alternative is named. The agent reading only this text cannot tell when to prefer search_components over search_blocks, get_component, or compose_page.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources