stitch-mcp-stdio

edit_screens

Destructive

Modify selected UI screens in a project using a text prompt to specify the edits you want.

Instructions

Edits existing screens within a project using a text prompt.

Instructions for Tool Call:

This action can take a few minutes to complete. Please be patient. DO NOT RETRY.
If the tool call fails due to connection error, the process may still succeed.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`prompt`	Yes	Required. The input text to generate the screen from.
`modelId`	No	Optional. The model to use for generation.
`projectId`	Yes	Required. The project ID of screens to edit, example: '4044680601076201931', without the `projects/` prefix.
`deviceType`	No	Optional. The type of device that captured the screenshot, e.g., mobile or desktop.
`selectedScreenIds`	Yes	Required. The screen IDs of screens to edit, example: ['98b50e2ddc9943efb387052637738f61', '98b50e2ddc9943efb387052637738f62'], without the `screens/` prefix.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`projectId`	No	The project ID of the generated screen. This is the same as the input project ID.
`sessionId`	No	The session ID of the generated screen.
`outputComponents`	No	The generated output components.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Sep 20, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: it warns that the action can take minutes, instructs the agent not to retry, and notes that a connection error may still lead to success. This is exactly the kind of runtime behavior an agent needs to avoid harmful retries, and it does not contradict destructiveHint=true.

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 front-loaded with a one-sentence purpose statement, then a compact bulleted list of crucial operational instructions. Every sentence earns its place and there is no filler.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a 5-parameter tool with a full schema and an output schema, the description plus annotations cover the safety profile and runtime behavior. The long-running/retry warning is the missing piece an agent cannot infer from schema, and it is included.

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 input schema already documents all five parameters. The description adds no extra meaning about parameters beyond the phrase 'using a text prompt', making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('edits') and a precise resource ('existing screens within a project'), which clearly separates it from sibling tools like generate_screen_from_text. An agent can tell what resource is affected without opening the schema.

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 general purpose 'edits existing screens' implies the intended use case, but there is no explicit guidance about when to choose this over generate_screen_from_text, generate_variants, or other siblings. It also gives no prerequisites or exclusions.

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

Deploy Server