Local Eyes

read_ui

Extract structured UI elements—types, labels, values, states—plus visible errors and layout issues from screenshots to diagnose interface problems.

Instructions

Read a UI screenshot: structured elements (type, label, value, state), visible errors, and layout issues.

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": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "read_ui"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`path`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 2, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses what the tool returns (elements, errors, layout issues), and 'Read' implies a non-mutating operation, but it does not explicitly state read-only behavior, accepted image formats, failure modes, or any permission/side-effect characteristics.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It quickly conveys the resource and the key output categories.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description adequately states the return scope. However, it leaves the required path semantics unexplained and does not explicitly position the tool against its siblings, which an agent needs for correct selection.

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

Parameters2/5

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

There is one required parameter, path, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description never explains what the path should point to, whether it is local or remote, or what formats are supported, so it does not compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 gives a clear verb and resource ('Read a UI screenshot') and specifies the output categories (structured elements, visible errors, layout issues). This distinguishes it somewhat from general image or text extraction, but it never names or contrasts with the sibling tools describe_image and extract_text.

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 'UI screenshot' and the listed UI-specific outputs, suggesting it is for structured UI interpretation rather than general image description or text extraction. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over describe_image or extract_text, and no exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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

Deploy Server