Skip to main content
Glama
appian-design

Design System MCP Server

list-components

Retrieve components from a design system category with source details to identify available UI elements and their documentation status.

Instructions

List components in a specific category with source information

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
categoryYesDesign system category (components, layouts, patterns)
includeInternalNoInclude internal documentation components (default: false)
sourceOnlyNoFilter by specific source

Implementation Reference

  • The handler implementation for the list-components tool. It validates the category, filters components based on source permissions, and formats the output.
    async ({ category, includeInternal, sourceOnly }) => {
      // Default to including internal if internal source is enabled
      const defaultIncludeInternal = sourceManager.getSourceStatus().some(s => s.name === 'internal' && s.enabled);
      const shouldIncludeInternal = includeInternal !== undefined ? includeInternal : defaultIncludeInternal;
      const normalizedCategory = category.toLowerCase();
      
      if (!(normalizedCategory in designSystemData)) {
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text",
              text: `Category not found. Available categories: ${Object.keys(designSystemData).join(", ")}`,
            },
          ],
        };
      }
      
      const items = [];
      const categoryData = designSystemData[normalizedCategory];
      
      for (const [key, component] of Object.entries(categoryData)) {
        const item = component as DesignSystemItem;
        
        // Check if content exists and get source information
        const sourcedContent = await sourceManager.getContent(item.filePath);
        
        if (!sourcedContent) {
          continue; // Skip if content not available
        }
        
        // Apply access control
        if (sourcedContent.source === 'internal' && !shouldIncludeInternal) {
          continue; // Skip internal content when not requested
        }
        
        // Apply source filtering
        if (sourceOnly && sourceOnly !== 'all' && sourcedContent.source !== sourceOnly) {
          continue; // Skip if doesn't match source filter
        }
        
        // Add source attribution to the listing
        const sourceLabel = sourcedContent.source.toUpperCase();
        const overrideInfo = sourcedContent.overrides ? ` (overrides ${sourcedContent.overrides.toUpperCase()})` : '';
        
        items.push(`**${key}**: ${item.title} - ${item.body}\n  *Source: ${sourceLabel}${overrideInfo}*`);
      }
      
      if (items.length === 0) {
        const accessNote = !shouldIncludeInternal ? " (use includeInternal=true to see internal components)" : "";
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text",
              text: `No accessible components found in ${normalizedCategory}${accessNote}`,
            },
          ],
        };
      }
      
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: "text",
            text: `Components in ${normalizedCategory}:\n\n${items.join("\n\n")}`,
          },
        ],
      };
    },
  • Input schema validation for the list-components tool.
    {
      category: z.string().describe("Design system category (components, layouts, patterns)"),
      includeInternal: z.boolean().optional().describe("Include internal documentation components (default: false)"),
      sourceOnly: z.enum(["public", "internal", "all"]).optional().describe("Filter by specific source"),
    },
  • src/index.ts:185-187 (registration)
    Registration of the list-components tool.
    server.tool(
      "list-components",
      "List components in a specific category with source information",
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 information' but doesn't specify what that includes (e.g., metadata, links, status). It doesn't describe the return format (e.g., list structure, pagination), error handling (e.g., for invalid categories), or performance considerations (e.g., rate limits). For a read operation with no annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps.

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 directly states the tool's purpose without redundancy. It is front-loaded with the core action ('List components') and includes essential qualifiers ('in a specific category with source information'). There is no wasted verbiage, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 (3 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the return values (e.g., what 'source information' entails), error conditions, or usage nuances. For a tool that likely returns a list of components with metadata, more detail is needed to guide an AI agent effectively, especially without annotations or output schema to fill in gaps.

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 already documents all three parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema: it implies the 'category' parameter is used for filtering and mentions 'source information', which loosely relates to 'includeInternal' and 'sourceOnly'. However, it doesn't provide additional context like examples or edge cases, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('components'), and specifies the scope ('in a specific category with source information'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'list-categories' (which lists categories rather than components) and 'get-component-details' (which gets details for a single component). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'search-design-system', which might also list components but with different filtering capabilities.

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 prerequisites (e.g., needing a valid category), exclusions (e.g., what happens if the category doesn't exist), or comparisons to siblings like 'search-design-system' (which might offer broader search capabilities) or 'get-content-sources' (which might list sources rather than components). The context is implied but not explicit.

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