Skip to main content
Glama
appian-design

Design System MCP Server

get-component-details

Retrieve detailed information about design system components, layouts, and patterns with source attribution and coding guidance.

Instructions

Get detailed information about a specific component with source attribution

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
categoryYesDesign system category (components, layouts, patterns)
componentNameYesName of the component, layout, or pattern
includeInternalNoInclude internal documentation if available (default: false)
sourceOnlyNoFilter by specific source
includeSailGuidanceNoInclude SAIL coding guidance (default: true for components/patterns/layouts)

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function for 'get-component-details' retrieves component data based on category and name, fetches content via the sourceManager, performs source filtering/internal access checks, and formats the response with attribution.
    async ({ category, componentName, includeInternal = false, sourceOnly, includeSailGuidance }) => {
      const normalizedCategory = category.toLowerCase();
      const normalizedComponentName = componentName.toLowerCase();
      
      if (!(normalizedCategory in designSystemData)) {
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text",
              text: `Category not found. Available categories: ${Object.keys(designSystemData).join(", ")}`,
            },
          ],
        };
      }
      
      const categoryData = designSystemData[normalizedCategory];
      
      if (!(normalizedComponentName in categoryData)) {
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text",
              text: `Component not found in ${normalizedCategory}. Available components: ${Object.keys(categoryData).join(", ")}`,
            },
          ],
        };
      }
      
      const component = categoryData[normalizedComponentName] as DesignSystemItem;
      
      // Use new source manager to get content
      const sourcedContent = await sourceManager.getContent(component.filePath);
      
      if (!sourcedContent) {
        console.error(`[ERROR] Unable to fetch content for ${component.title} at ${component.filePath}`);
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text",
              text: `Failed to fetch details for ${component.title}.\n\nBasic information:\n${component.body}\n\nFile path: ${component.filePath}\n\nNote: This may be due to GitHub API limits, network issues, or authentication problems. Check server logs for details.`,
            },
          ],
        };
      }
    
      // Apply source filtering
      if (sourceOnly && sourceOnly !== 'all' && sourcedContent.source !== sourceOnly) {
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text",
              text: `Component ${component.title} not available from ${sourceOnly} source. Available from: ${sourcedContent.source}`,
            },
          ],
        };
      }
    
      // Check internal access
      if (sourcedContent.source === 'internal' && !includeInternal) {
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text",
              text: `Component ${component.title} is only available in internal documentation. Set includeInternal=true to access.`,
            },
          ],
        };
      }
      
      let response = `# ${component.title}\n\n${component.body}\n\n`;
      
      // Add source attribution
      response += `**Source:** ${sourcedContent.source.toUpperCase()}`;
      if (sourcedContent.overrides) {
        response += ` (overrides ${sourcedContent.overrides})`;
      }
      response += '\n';
      
      // Add frontmatter info if available
      if (Object.keys(sourcedContent.frontmatter).length > 0) {
        response += `**Status:** ${sourcedContent.frontmatter.status || 'Unknown'}\n`;
        if (sourcedContent.last_updated) {
          response += `**Last Updated:** ${sourcedContent.last_updated}\n`;
        }
        response += '\n';
      }
      
      // Parse content sections (reuse existing logic)
      const parsedContent = parseFrontmatter(sourcedContent.content);
      
      // Add Design section
      if (parsedContent.designSection) {
        response += `## Design\n\n${parsedContent.designSection}\n\n`;
      }
      
      // Add Development section
      if (parsedContent.developmentSection) {
        response += `## Development\n\n${parsedContent.developmentSection}`;
      }
  • src/index.ts:264-273 (registration)
    Registration of the 'get-component-details' tool, including parameter schema validation using zod.
    server.tool(
      "get-component-details",
      "Get detailed information about a specific component with source attribution",
      {
        category: z.string().describe("Design system category (components, layouts, patterns)"),
        componentName: z.string().describe("Name of the component, layout, or pattern"),
        includeInternal: z.boolean().optional().describe("Include internal documentation if available (default: false)"),
        sourceOnly: z.enum(["public", "internal", "all"]).optional().describe("Filter by specific source"),
        includeSailGuidance: z.boolean().optional().describe("Include SAIL coding guidance (default: true for components/patterns/layouts)"),
      },
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'source attribution' but doesn't explain what that entails (e.g., public vs. internal sources, attribution format). It also lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or output structure, leaving significant gaps for a tool with 5 parameters.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose. It wastes no words and avoids redundancy, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the complexity (5 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It doesn't address output format, error cases, or how parameters affect results (e.g., the impact of 'includeSailGuidance'). For a tool fetching 'detailed information,' more context on what details are returned is needed.

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 fully documents all 5 parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, only implying that parameters relate to 'detailed information' and 'source attribution.' It doesn't clarify interactions between parameters (e.g., how 'sourceOnly' and 'includeInternal' relate) or provide usage examples.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Get detailed information about a specific component with source attribution.' It specifies the verb ('Get'), resource ('component'), and key feature ('source attribution'). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'list-components' or 'search-design-system' beyond the 'detailed information' aspect.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention sibling tools like 'list-components' (for listing) or 'search-design-system' (for broader searches), nor does it specify prerequisites or exclusions. The agent must infer usage from the name and parameters alone.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/appian-design/aurora-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server