Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
refero-design-mcp

refero-design-mcp

by DarCas
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get a style as structured data

refero_get_style
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a design system's parsed tokens plus live-site measurements—colors, fonts, radii, spacing—as JSON, so you can consume structured styles programmatically instead of prose.

Instructions

Return the parsed design system plus the measured tokens scraped from the live site (colours, fonts, radii, spacing) as JSON. Prefer refero_get_design_md when you want prose to feed into a document.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
refreshNoBypass the local cache and refetch (conditional request).
style_idYesStyle UUID.
include_measured_tokensNoInclude the raw extracted token measurements (default true).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.1.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations cover safety (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive) and open-world access. The description adds the semantic distinction of structured JSON vs. prose, which is useful, but doesn't mention caching behavior or that refresh bypasses cache (that's only in the schema). With annotations already covering the safety profile, this is adequate but not rich.

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 tight sentences: first states what is returned, second routes to the sibling. No waste and front-loaded.

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?

Complete enough for a read-only retrieval tool: it says what data is returned (design system + tokens) and when to use the alternative. It doesn't mention whether results are paginated or cached, but annotations and schema cover most needs.

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 coverage is 100%, with descriptions for refresh, style_id, and include_measured_tokens. The description doesn't add parameter detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: returns parsed design system and measured tokens as JSON. It names the sibling it is not (refero_get_design_md), which helps an agent distinguish the two retrieval tools.

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?

Explicitly states when to prefer the alternative: use refero_get_design_md when prose is wanted for a document. This directly answers when-to-use-this-vs-sibling.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools