stitch-pro-mcp

Convert to React

sp_to_react

Read-onlyIdempotent

Converts HTML and Tailwind code into React/Next.js components with state, props, hooks, and optional shadcn, Radix, or MUI component mapping.

Instructions

Convert HTML/Tailwind to Next.js/React components with proper state, props, hooks, and optional shadcn/radix/MUI mapping

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": {
      "html": "<html>"
    },
    "name": "sp_to_react"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`html`	Yes	HTML/Tailwind source to convert
`componentLibrary`	No		none
`appRouter`	No	Use Next.js App Router (React only)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0May 26, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate readOnly, non-destructive, idempotent behavior. The description adds that the tool generates React components with state, props, hooks, and optional library mapping, providing context beyond annotations without contradiction.

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 sentence that conveys all essential information without extraneous text, effectively front-loading the key action and scope.

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?

Given the tool has only 3 parameters and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context for a conversion tool, though it could briefly mention the output type (e.g., code string). Overall, it is fairly complete.

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 67% (2 of 3 parameters described). The description doesn't add significant details beyond the schema for parameters, but it contextualizes the tool's purpose, which helps. The parameter semantics are adequately covered by schema and description combined.

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 the tool converts HTML/Tailwind to Next.js/React components, listing specific features like state, props, hooks, and optional component libraries, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like sp_to_svelte and sp_to_vue.

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?

The description implies usage when converting HTML/Tailwind to React/Next.js but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like sp_to_svelte or sp_to_vue, nor does it mention when not to use it.

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

Deploy Server