eds-mcp-server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

List components

list_components

Retrieve a list of design system components with their IDs, purposes, domains, and regulatory flags, optionally filtered by domain.

Instructions

Every component id + purpose + domain + regulatory flags, optionally filtered by domain.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_components"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`domain`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.17.0Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the returned fields and optional filter, but lacks details on pagination, ordering, safety (though read-only is implied), rate limits, or any constraints. Minimal behavioral disclosure.

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?

One sentence (15 words) that is front-loaded with key output fields and the filter option. Every word contributes; no redundant or vague phrasing.

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 listing tool, the description covers purpose and filter but omits pagination, default ordering, or behavior when no domain specified. Given no output schema, it could be more informative, but remains adequate for basic use.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It adds context that the domain parameter is an optional filter. However, no details on allowed values (e.g., enumeration examples) or format. Adequate but not rich.

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?

The description clearly states that the tool returns component id, purpose, domain, and regulatory flags for every component, with optional domain filtering. This is a specific verb (list) and resource (components) distinction from siblings like get_component (single) or search_components (different filtering).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_components or find_by_regulation. The description only mentions optional domain filtering but does not state when it is appropriate or when to avoid it.

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