claude.design-mcp
1-line summary: Drive the real claude.ai/design web app from your editor/agent through your own logged-in Chrome session — create, iterate on, inspect, and pull designs on your own account.
design_login— one-time Chrome login to claude.ai/design; the session persists and is reused.design_create— create a project and generate a design from a prompt (optionalname; find-or-create on reuse).design_iterate— send a follow-up prompt to an existing project to modify a design.design_list— list your claude.ai/design projects from the logged-in account.design_pull— download a project's files (byprojectIdor exactname) into a local dir, optionally as a zip.design_preview— render a project's self-contained HTML to a full-page PNG for visual review.design_get— read one file from a project.design_status— summarize project data, chat count, and last message role.design_edit— apply direct string edits to a project file (changes remote data).design_delete— delete a project (changes remote data).Everything runs as you over CDP/
playwright-core; reads are focus-free and don't navigate or focus your frontmost tab.Generation is triggered the way the site does it (typed into the composer, then awaited via ReleaseTurn + file-tree stability);
pull/previewalways fetch the latest state.Note: the README documents additional tools not in this schema —
design_variants,design_check,design_system_sync,design_system_list— plus options likemodel,effort,designSystem/withoutDesignSystem,wait, anddetails.
Click on "Deploy Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type
@followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@claude.design-mcpCreate a design for a tech startup landing page"
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
claude.design-mcp
An MCP that drives the real Claude Design web app from your editor/agent — log in once, then create, iterate on, and pull designs that Claude Design generates on your own account (not a local imitation).
Migrating from standalone Claude Design (closes 2026-12-14)
Version 0.14.0 uses claude.ai Design artifacts, backed by a Cowork session or
Chat conversation, rather than the retiring standalone claude.ai/design service.
projectId is now the artifact UUID; old standalone ids are not interchangeable.
Legacy standalone projects remain available as local pulls, not automatically
converted artifacts. Only the CLAUDE_DESIGN_BACKEND=standalone rollback and legacy
/design/p/ links still depend on that service.
The migration progressed in these releases:
0.7.0: artifacts became the default backend. Six design systems were migrated on 2026-10-09, then re-synced through the artifacts-native path.
0.8.0:
design_system_syncattaches a package zip to a Design System Cowork session (now also Chat), publishes an artifact and verifies SHA-256 file hashes. No standalone upload, migration API or Claude Code/design-syncis involved. Preserve.design-sync/config.json:artifactIdpins main andartifactIds.subpins sub. Sync reads these pins but never writes them. A verified precheck skips the generation turn; see Design-system sync.0.8.1: all generation paths default to Opus 5.5 / extra, including edit and design-system sync.
0.9.0: optional
account: "main" | "sub"isolates sub inchrome-profile-subon CDP9378; project-id follow-ups resolve the account from the local index. Sub is opt-in only. Chat surfaces (/chat/<uuid>?artifact=<id>) are also supported.0.9.1: Chat live status uses the conversation list's
workspace_session_idto read the backing session; idlereview_readyis a finished bucket alongsidecompletedandblocked. Message-based checks remain the discovery-failure fallback.0.9.2: artifacts-only tool metadata is concise; standalone metadata is unchanged.
0.9.3: the artifacts design-system picker re-reads the menu after every click, so a system other than the preselected one (and
withoutDesignSystem) is applied reliably. A create that fails before sending also deletes its Cowork session, not just the artifact.0.10.0:
design_system_syncaccepts native Design System packages (bundle, list-shaped tokens, removals); see Design-system sync.0.11.0: CLI calls are recorded,
design_historyreads artifact prompt turns, anddesign_listcan include Design System artifacts.0.12.0: the session Chrome runs headless by default with the headed Chrome UA;
CLAUDE_DESIGN_HEADLESS=0restores the off-screen window.0.13.0: the MCP server closes an idle session Chrome after 20 minutes (
CLAUDE_DESIGN_IDLE_CLOSE_MS); the next call relaunches it headless.0.14.0: preview paths accept query/hash state and optional CSS-pixel
clip; successful MCP pulls return their snapshotrevision(string or null).
Related MCP server: Browser Agent MCP
Using it from OpenCode (claude-design skill)
The MCP supplies tools; the OpenCode claude-design skill supplies the workflow.
Load ~/.config/opencode/skills/claude-design/SKILL.md and the references it directs
you to. The claude-design-worker subagent owns waiting generation/sync work and
returns a text report, leaving the parent free to continue other work.
Design-system first: discover a synced system before generating. design_create
and design_variants require exactly one of designSystem or
withoutDesignSystem: true; intentional opt-outs may include
withoutDesignSystemReason. Do not silently generate an ungrounded brand design.
Typical skill-driven flow:
Worker submits
design_create({prompt, designSystem, wait:false}).Worker polls
design_check({projectId}); report permission/input requests rather than approving them automatically.On
done, calldesign_pull({projectId})withoutdirorzip. The skill's dashboard-registration gate uses this default pull's returnedrevisionand history record.Review locally, then
design_iterate({projectId, prompt, wait:false}), check and default-pull again. This is the skill policy; raw MCP create/iterate default towait:true.
Use account:"sub" only when explicitly requested; omit it otherwise. Subsequent
project-id calls inherit the indexed account, while name-based calls need an explicit
account for sub. Defaults are Opus 5.5 / extra. Generation consumes usage;
design_edit also runs a turn rather than a free file-write RPC, and sync consumes
a turn unless its precheck skips (a corrective sync turn consumes more usage).
Backends
CLAUDE_DESIGN_BACKEND=artifacts is the default; standalone is the legacy rollback.
Tool names and structural input schemas are identical (descriptions differ);
the backend is selected on each call.
An invalid backend value rejects calls, but does not prevent initialization or tool listing.
For artifacts, projectId is the artifact UUID, sessionId is the Cowork cse_… id,
and results identify backend: "artifacts". Listing and generation URLs use
https://claude.ai/cowork/<sessionId>?artifact=<projectId>; an artifact without a known
session links to https://claude.ai/code/artifact/<projectId>. Standalone project URLs
remain https://claude.ai/design/p/<projectId>; ids from one backend are not interchangeable.
design_check reads the Cowork session, events and artifact manifest through APIs,
without navigating the project page or automatically approving permission requests:
Status | Artifacts meaning |
| Session requires action ( |
| Successful result after the latest real prompt, with non-empty output changed from the submission baseline (or no known baseline); a |
| Successful result, but empty output or the same signature as the baseline |
| Error/non-success result, or an idle completed worker with a prompt but no result |
| Worker is active and its latest event is within the stall threshold |
| No real prompt, or active worker whose last event exceeds the stall threshold |
Artifacts checks return checkPath: "artifacts", answeredQuestions: false, and never
auto-resume; resume_exhausted belongs only to the standalone backend. Tool-result user
events and composer echoes (<local-command-stdout>Set model…) are not real prompts; zero-turn
result events are session handshakes. A worker counts as finished when it is idle in bucket
completed, blocked or review_ready. costUsd is the turn's cost (session total_cost_usd delta). CLAUDE_DESIGN_STALL_MS defaults to 600000 (10 minutes).
Artifacts pulls strip the manifest's project/ prefix, write the Design runtime as
support.js next to each *.dc.html, download referenced assets into _blob/, and rewrite
successful blob references to relative paths. Failed downloads are reported in errors
and keep their original references. Zip pulls archive the same layout. Default pulls
(no explicit dir or zip) still create revision snapshots, including runtime and blobs.
Signatures hash sorted, prefix-stripped path:sha256 pairs for project/ files only.
design_edit has no artifacts file-write API. It runs an
instructed Cowork/chat turn in a background operation page, requires each old string to occur
exactly once, then re-reads the file to verify the literal edits. It is not a direct RPC edit.
The local artifact/session index is
~/.cache/claude-design-mcp/artifacts-index.json; override its directory with
CLAUDE_DESIGN_STATE_DIR. It records names, sessions and submission baselines; writes
are atomic with private directory/file permissions (0700/0600).
Accounts
Every tool accepts optional account: "main" | "sub". Main is the default; use sub
only when the user explicitly asks. Sub requires the artifacts backend: standalone
rejects it with sub account requires the artifacts backend.
Account | Chrome profile | CDP port | Overrides |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Calls run in isolated async account contexts and reuse a separate session cache per
account. Resolution is explicit account > the projectId index entry's account >
main. Old entries without an account belong to main. Thus design_pull({projectId})
automatically follows a sub artifact created by this server. Name reuse is scoped to
the selected account; name-based pull/preview resolve to main unless account is
given. Use design_login({account:"sub"}) to report the sub account's email and org.
design_create, design_iterate, design_preview, design_variants, design_pull
and design_check keep their existing result shapes. Account is recorded at the top
level of history, after sessionId, and appears in login/status/sync results and each
design/design-system list item.
Sync a package to sub with node src/server.mjs sync <dir> --account sub or
design_system_sync({dir:"<dir>", account:"sub"}). Main keeps the existing
.design-sync/config.json artifactId pin; sub uses artifactIds.sub. With no valid
pin, sync matches the title in that account or creates a new artifact. The server
never writes this config or the package directory. An already verified target returns
ok:true, skipped:true, created:false without opening an operation page or sending
a Cowork turn. Verification checks verbatim file hashes, README presence, index title,
list-shaped color tokens when required, and absence of index editing/source keys.
CLI result lines include account and skipped.
Chat and Cowork surfaces
The artifacts backend detects the surface opened by claude.ai: Cowork uses
/cowork/cse_…?artifact=<id>, while Chat uses /chat/<conversationUuid>?artifact=<id>.
The local index stores surface and chatId so later iterate/check/status calls use
the same conversation. Chat message reads use the credentials-only conversation API.
Chat submissions are confirmed by increased human-message count; prep tool messages
before the first human do not count as a turn. Terminal end_turn/stop_sequence
messages produce done/no_output according to the artifact signature; max_tokens and
refusal are interrupted. Human senders are reported as user.
Chat checks discover and cache workspaceSessionId from up to four 50-item pages of
the credentials-only conversation list, then read that backing session through CCR.
An active session reports pending action types or generating/stalled using its latest
event and CLAUDE_DESIGN_STALL_MS (10 minutes by default); iterate also respects known
session activity. An idle finished session uses terminal chat messages, allowing 60 seconds
from the newer of its latest event and the prompt's creation time for a delayed reply,
then reporting interrupted with problem: "idle_without_result". Discovery/read failures
fall back to messages and CLAUDE_DESIGN_CHAT_STALL_MS (30 minutes by default).
Chat results omit sessionId and costUsd; existing URL fields point at the Chat
conversation. No surface/chatId fields are added to strict tool results. Cowork
result contracts remain unchanged. If creation fails before sending a prompt, the
artifact id is recovered from the URL even if conversation navigation did not finish,
and the blank artifact and its local index entry are cleaned up.
How it works
It drives your own logged-in Chrome (a dedicated profile) over CDP with
playwright-core, and talks to the real frame and Cowork session APIs as you, through your browser session. The selectable standalone backend uses theclaude.ai/design"Omelette" API instead.Generation is triggered the way the website does it — your prompt is typed into the design composer and submitted; the tool then waits for the turn to finish (the Cowork session result + artifact signature; standalone uses
ReleaseTurnand file-tree stability) and reports the files Claude Design wrote. Files are pulled back to local on request.Artifacts metadata and deletes use frame APIs; downloads use manifest file URLs. Standalone metadata, files, deletes, and direct file edits use the JSON RPCs (
CreateProject/ListFiles/GetFile/EditFile/DeleteProject), run in-page so they share your session + Cloudflare clearance.Focus-free reads use an existing claude.ai page without navigating or focusing it. If none exists, CDP creates one background target; subsequent reads reuse that target.
Not a
claude -pmimic. Every design is produced by claude.ai itself.
Official Design MCP and protocol verdict (2026-08-12)
This project is an independent CDP browser-automation MCP. It does not call the official
api.anthropic.com/v1/design/mcp endpoint. As described in How it works, it
uses playwright-core and CDP to drive a real Chrome session that is already logged into the
actual claude.ai web app. The dated export example below describes the standalone backend.
The claude.ai/design UI's Create prompt for Claude Code export message hands off a project
URL in the form https://claude.ai/design/p/<projectId>. For this server, the matching flow is
to extract <projectId> from that URL and call design_pull. The official Design MCP is not
needed to receive the generated files.
The MCP protocol revision discussed around 2026-07-28, including the stateless wire-protocol
change adopted by some MCP ecosystems, has no practical effect on the current OpenCode stdio
client integration or tool contract. This server responds to initialization with the fixed
protocolVersion: "2024-11-05" handshake.
Re-review this verdict if any of these conditions occurs:
The OpenCode MCP client drops support for the older handshake version this server returns.
The project decides to replace its CDP browser-automation approach with the official
api.anthropic.com/v1/design/mcpendpoint.claude.ai changes its authentication or session model in a way that affects the CDP-driven login flow.
Tools
Tool | Does |
| One-time: open Chrome to log into Claude Design (session persists) |
| List your Design artifacts (standalone: projects); |
| Create a project and generate a design from a prompt — |
| Generate multiple design variants of one prompt in parallel — |
| Send a follow-up prompt to modify a design — |
| Download a project's files to local — |
| Render project HTML to a PNG — |
| Read one file from a project — |
| Report a project's chat/turn state — |
| Poll an asynchronous generation — |
| Verified literal file edits via a usage-consuming Cowork turn (standalone: direct RPC) — |
| Delete a project — |
| Create or update a Design System artifact through a usage-consuming Cowork turn — |
| List Design System instances (name + id + optional publication/default fields); standalone follows the project list |
| Read prompt turns, assistant replies and turn results for an artifact; artifacts backend only |
Every tool also accepts an optional caller object — { directory, sessionID, agent, project? } — that
the MCP client may inject to say who is calling. It is never a generation argument: the dispatcher strips
it before the handler runs and only records it in the call history.
Call history
Every tools/call dispatch appends exactly one JSON line to
~/.local/share/opencode-dashboard/claude-design-history/events.ndjsonl (dir 0700, file 0600;
override the folder with CLAUDE_DESIGN_HISTORY_DIR), so a prompt history survives across MCP restarts.
A line carries v, eventId, seq, ts, tool, durationMs, ok, error, projectId, projects,
projectName, prompt (verbatim, never truncated), model, designSystem, withoutDesignSystem,
withoutDesignSystemReason, wait, attemptId, caller, pullKind, revision, backend, sessionId, account, and a whitelisted result summary (counts, ids, file signature, and remote update time only — never file
contents, base64, or environment values). Recording is best-effort observability: a failed write only warns
on stderr and never turns a working tool call into an error. CLI create, iterate, check, pull,
sync, and history calls also record one line each. Their caller comes from the normalized
CLAUDE_DESIGN_CALLER JSON object, or defaults to { "agent": "cli" }; set
CLAUDE_DESIGN_CLI_HISTORY=0 to disable CLI recording. A sync result with ok: false is recorded
as a failed call, including its error.
Revision snapshots
A successful plain design_pull (pullKind: "default" — no dir, no zip) also snapshots the pulled
manifest into <CLAUDE_DESIGN_DIR>/.revisions/<projectId>/<revisionId>/, outside the pulled tree, so a
design's edit history can be diffed later. revisionId is <YYYYMMDDTHHmmssSSS>-<uuid8> in UTC, so name
order is time order. Each folder carries a .meta.json with the per-file SHA-256 list, a total hash, and
incomplete: true when the pull reported partial file errors. The snapshot is staged in
.staging-<revisionId>/ and atomically renamed, so listers only ever see finished revisions (skip any name
starting with .). A pull whose content hash and completeness both match the previous revision is skipped
and reports revision: null, meaning "unchanged — the previous revision is still current". Snapshot
failures are non-fatal in the same way: revision: null plus an stderr warning, pull success preserved.
Every successful MCP design_pull JSON response includes revision (string or null),
without changing the result recorded in history. Custom-dir and zip pulls return null;
null alone does not distinguish unchanged content, ineligible pulls or snapshot failures.
Preview URL state and cropping
Both backends accept path: "Stock Detail Tabs.html?stock=INTC&tab=earnings#B".
Only the bare file path is used for listing and asset lookup; the query/hash is appended
to the renderer's encoded local URL. The result's NFC-normalized path includes the
suffix, and the PNG name uses the bare path plus a sanitized, digest-tagged suffix so
different URL states do not overwrite each other. Unsuffixed filenames are unchanged.
Optional clip: {x, y, width, height} crops in document CSS pixels. All four values
must be finite numbers: x/y >= 0, width/height > 0, x + width <= 10000,
y + height <= 20000, and width * height <= 40M. Invalid clips fail before obtaining
a session or launching a renderer. Keep the requested rectangle inside the page;
capturedSize describes the requested crop, while pageSize remains the full page.
An intentional crop has truncated:false; without clip the existing automatic caps apply.
Preview owns a separate context and never navigates or closes the claude.ai session page.
See preview and pull contracts for examples.
Setup
Focus-free reads
design_list, design_pull, design_get, design_status, design_preview, and
design_system_list run background APIs without focusing or navigating a visible tab.
design_delete uses the same background API path but changes remote data.
design_edit opens an operation page for a Cowork turn (standalone: focus-free RPC).
design_preview renders with a separate headless browser by default. Artifacts
design_check is API-only; standalone checks may use held pages or UI fallback.
Generation (design_create, design_iterate) uses its composer operation page.
design_list details
Pass { "details": true } (CLI: list --details) to receive fileCount,
remoteUpdatedAt, and signature for each ordinary project. Design systems do not
have these file stats. Artifacts signatures use sorted path:sha256 pairs for project
files; standalone uses path:version pairs. Both match non-zip design_pull results.
{ "limit": 20 } (CLI: list --limit 20) reads only the first N projects —
standalone ListProjects returns favourites first, then the most recently viewed — so a limit of
20 costs one RPC. A limited read never replaces the cached full listing that
design_pull uses. With details: true, { "detailsFor": ["<projectId>", ...] }
restricts the per-artifact manifests (standalone: ListFiles) to those ids; other items come back
without file stats.
npm install # installs playwright-core (NO browser download — uses your Chrome)
node src/server.mjs login # opens Chrome once; log into claude.ai (session is then reused, invisibly)Register as a local MCP (opencode example):
{ "mcp": { "claude-design": { "type": "local", "command": ["node", "/abs/path/claude.design-mcp/src/server.mjs"], "enabled": true } } }CLI
node src/server.mjs login
node src/server.mjs list
node src/server.mjs list --details
node src/server.mjs list --limit 20 --details
node src/server.mjs list --design-systems
node src/server.mjs list-systems
node src/server.mjs history <projectId>
node src/server.mjs create "simple pricing card" pricing --design-system "Frontend Design System"
node src/server.mjs create "minimal landing page for a coffee shop" coffee --model opus --without-design-system
node src/server.mjs iterate <projectId> "add a dark mode toggle to the header" --model sonnet
node src/server.mjs check <projectId>
node src/server.mjs pull <projectId|name>
node src/server.mjs preview <projectId|name> [outDir] [width]
node src/server.mjs delete <projectId>
node src/server.mjs sync <packageDir> [--timeout-ms 900000]CLI list --design-systems appends Design System instances to the project list. CLI
history <projectId> returns prompt turns for an artifacts project. Calls to create, iterate,
check, pull, sync, and history are recorded by default; set CLAUDE_DESIGN_CLI_HISTORY=0
to disable recording. Set CLAUDE_DESIGN_CALLER to a JSON caller object to override the default
{ "agent": "cli" } caller.
After the one-time login, reads reuse the Chrome session without changing the
frontmost tab. Generation still uses its composer page.
Generation options
design_create,design_iterate, anddesign_variantsaccept an optionalmodel. Use a family (opus,sonnet,haiku, orfable) to select that family's newest version from the live composer menu. Pin a version with forms such asopus-5.5,opus-5,opus 5.0,claude-opus-5-5, oranthropic/claude-opus-5-5. Withoutmodelthe server defaults toopus-5.5. New family versions become available automatically when they appear in the site menu. If a requested version is unavailable, the error lists the live menu options. For CLIcreateanditerate, pass the same value to--model.design_createanddesign_iterateaccept an optionaleffort:low,medium,high,extra, ormax, matching the composer's Effort menu (xhighis an alias ofextra). Withouteffortevery generation usesextra. If the composer cannot be set to the effort (explicit or default) the call fails before the prompt is sent, with the live options in the error. Effort is applied before submission. CLI:--effort <value>.design_create,design_iterate, anddesign_variantsaccept adesignSystem(CLI--design-system), the name of one of the account design systems reported bydesign_system_list. It is matched case-insensitively, an unambiguous partial name works, and an unknown name errors with the list the composer offers. The chosen system replaces the org default rather than adding to it, and the result echoes the resolved name. Artifacts reselect the system on each requested turn, including iterate and name reuse; the call errors if no picker is shown. In the artifacts menu a click selects only that system and a click on the checked one clears it (trigger:No design system); a failed selection error lists every option with its checked state. The legacy standalone picker works only before a project has produced a design.design_variantsgrounds every variant in the same system.Grounding is mandatory on
design_createanddesign_variants. Each call must carry exactly one of a non-blankdesignSystemorwithoutDesignSystem: true(the booleantrue, not"true"or1) — never both, never neither. A violation is refused with one fixed message that nameslist_claude_synced_systems/design_system_listas the way to discover the available names, and the refusal happens before a browser session, an operation page, or a project exists, so a rejected call leaves the account untouched. Ondesign_variantsthe check runs above the fan-out, so a refused call creates zero projects instead of returning per-variant errors. An opt-out may carry a free-textwithoutDesignSystemReason, which is only valid together withwithoutDesignSystem: true; both are echoed in the result and recorded in the call history. The CLI equivalent iscreate --without-design-system;iteraterejects that flag as unknown.design_iterateis deliberately not grounding-gated.Artifacts
design_variantssubmits every variant withwait: falseand returns pending ids without previews — poll each withdesign_check.design_variantsforcesfresh: trueon every project it creates. Each variant is named<base>-v<N>, and withoutfresha rerun would reuse the same-named project from an earlier fan-out instead of producing independent variants.design_createanddesign_iterateacceptwait(defaulttrue). Setwait: falseto return after a confirmed Cowork submission (standalone: verifiedChatPOST and bounded question-form watch) with{ submitted: true, pending: true }; the CLI equivalent is--no-wait. A click or Enter press that does not confirm submission fails instead of reporting success.design_createwith an explicitnameis find-or-create: an existing project with that exact name is reused (newest wins on collisions) and the result carriesreused: true, so repeated calls iterate one project instead of piling up duplicates. Passfresh: trueto force a new project. Withoutname(prompt-derived name), every call creates a new project as before.Poll with
design_check({projectId})(CLI:check <projectId>). Artifacts use the API status mapping in Backends, never auto-approve or auto-resume. Legacy standalone may answer question forms, resume interruptions (up to three attempts, thenresume_exhausted), or rerun failed verification checks (up to twice).
Asynchronous workflow
# 1. Submit without waiting
node src/server.mjs create "카드 UI" my-card --no-wait --model opus --without-design-system
# → { projectId: "...", submitted: true, pending: true }
# 2. Continue with other work...
# 3. Poll for completion (every 2-5 minutes is recommended)
node src/server.mjs check <projectId>
# → { status: "done", files: [...] }
# 4. Pull and preview the finished design
node src/server.mjs pull <projectId>
node src/server.mjs preview <projectId>Requirements
Node.js 22+ (uses built-in
fetch/WebSocket;playwright-coreis the only npm dependency)Google Chrome (the tools drive a dedicated Chrome profile)
A claude.ai account with Design access (you log in once via
design_login)
Env
CLAUDE_DESIGN_BACKEND—artifacts(default) orstandalone(legacy service closes 2026-12-14)CLAUDE_DESIGN_STATE_DIR— artifact/session index directory (default~/.cache/claude-design-mcp)CLAUDE_DESIGN_STALL_MS— artifacts active-worker inactivity threshold (default600000)CLAUDE_DESIGN_PROFILE— dedicated Chrome profile dir (default~/.cache/claude-design-mcp/chrome-profile)CLAUDE_DESIGN_CHROME— path to Google Chrome (default: macOS Google Chrome)CLAUDE_DESIGN_CDP_PORT— remote-debugging port (default9377)CLAUDE_DESIGN_DIR— wheredesign_pull/design_previewwrite, each into its own<project>/folder (default: the working folder); an explicitdirargument is used verbatimCLAUDE_DESIGN_HISTORY_DIR— where thetools/callhistory is appended (default~/.local/share/opencode-dashboard/claude-design-history, fileevents.ndjsonl)CLAUDE_DESIGN_HEADLESS— default: headless Chrome (--headless=new; no window, Dock icon or focus change). Set0(false/off/no) to use the legacy off-screen window.design_loginstill opens a visible window only when the profile is signed out, and the signed-in profile is relaunched headless once login completes. The mode in use is recorded in<profile>/.claude-design-chrome-modeCLAUDE_DESIGN_USER_AGENT— headless UA override. Default: the headed reduced UA of the installed Chrome major version (Chrome/<major>.0.0.0, read from the bundleInfo.plistor--version), so headless Chrome never advertisesHeadlessChrome. With a UA override Chrome leaves the high-entropy UA-CH values (fullVersionList,platformVersion) empty; if a site starts rejecting that, setCLAUDE_DESIGN_HEADLESS=0CLAUDE_DESIGN_IDLE_CLOSE_MS— MCP server only (never the CLI): gracefully closes an account's session Chrome after this many ms with no tool call in flight and no held async-generation page (default1200000, 20 minutes;0keeps it running). Login cookies stay in the profile, so the next call simply relaunches it. Tabs this server does not own (operation pages or other sites, e.g. a CLI run on the same Chrome) defer the close by another idle period; a CLI RPC that only uses the home tab can still lose its Chrome at the exact close moment and should be retriedCLAUDE_DESIGN_TURN_TIMEOUT_MS— hard cap per generation turn (create ~360s, iterate ~240s defaults)CLAUDE_DESIGN_QUIET_MS— how long the turn network must stay silent before a generation is judged complete (default20000)CLAUDE_DESIGN_PAGE_LEASE_MS— independent hard cap for an async owner page if its completion monitor hangs (default2700000, 45 minutes)CLAUDE_DESIGN_CLAUDE_BIN— standalone-only Claude Code binary used by sync (defaultclaude)CLAUDE_DESIGN_SYNC_TIMEOUT_MS— standalone-only hard cap for one/design-syncrun (default900000, 15 minutes); artifacts usestimeoutMs
Design-system sync
Artifacts (default)
design_system_sync({ dir, model?, effort?, timeoutMs? }) (CLI: sync <dir> [--timeout-ms ms])
reads a materialized package with package.json + styles.css (or, for a native package,
components/bundle.css), snapshots its regular files,
attaches a zip to a background Cowork/chat session, and publishes a Design System artifact.
It does not modify the package directory or write a pin automatically.
Lookup/create title: a description ending in
design systembecomes<prefix> Design System(preserving the prefix's case); otherwise the title is<package.name> Design System.Target resolution: a UUID in
.design-sync/config.json(artifactIdfor main,artifactIds.subfor sub) wins if present indesign_system_list; otherwise use an exact title match. Multiple title matches refuse without opening an operation page; no match creates a new Design System artifact. Existing artifacts keep their current list title, including capitalization. A pinnedFrontend Design Systemis never renamed to the package-derivedfrontend Design System.Pin future runs by preserving
.design-sync/config.jsonand adding the returned id to the account's pin field; keep any existing standaloneprojectId. Stale pins fall back to title lookup.If the resolved target already passes verification, return
ok:true, skipped:true, created:falsewithout opening an operation page or submitting a turn.All dot-files/dot-directories,
node_modules/,ds-bundle/, and symlinks are excluded. Packagemanifest.jsonbecomesproject/docs/manifest.json;package.jsonis not published. Bothreadme.mdandREADME.mdfeed Claude'sproject/README.md.Claude follows the type's SKILL.md, publishes listed files byte-for-byte using Artifact
root/filesmapping, convertstokens/tokens.jsonto list-shapedproject/tokens.json, and writesproject/design-system.jsonlast with the kept title andlastChange.via: "opencode-dashboard sync". Migrated indexes finish migration by removingeditingandsource. Other existing files are kept; page-generated files are not written.Native packages (0.10.0) follow the type's file table so designs can mount real components: a root list-shaped
tokens.jsonis published verbatim (no conversion), andcomponents/bundle.jswhose line 1 is/* @ds-bundle: {"format":4,"namespace":"<Ns>",…} */makes the index declarenamespace: "<Ns>"and React/ReactDOM 18libraries(verified after the turn). An optionalremovearray in.design-sync/config.jsonlists obsolete remote paths the turn deletes ("project/<path>": null); verification fails while any remains. Standalone-shaped packages produce exactly the same prompt as before.Verification compares the published manifest SHA-256 for every verbatim target, requires
project/README.md, checks the index title, rejects leftover migration keys, and requires a non-emptycolor.tokensarray when source colors exist. One mismatch triggers at most one corrective turn in the same session. A non-doneturn or persistent mismatch isok: false.Defaults: Opus 5.5 / extra / 900000 ms per turn. Model and effort are explicitly applied before submission. This consumes account usage and can take minutes; a corrective turn also consumes usage.
costUsd, when available, sums the sync turns' costs.Results:
{ ok, dir, backend: "artifacts", systemName, artifactId, projectId: artifactId, sessionId, url, created, verified: { files, mismatched }, costUsd?, status?, error? }.verified.filescounts verbatim files whose SHA matched;mismatchednames failed paths. Failures are returned rather than thrown. The temporary zip is always cleaned up.CLI emits JSON progress lines
{ type: "progress", stream: "claude", text }and one result line includingok,systemName,error,artifactId,sessionId,url,created, andverified. Exit status is 0 only forok: true, otherwise 1; dashboard runners require both exit 0 andok: true. No standalone upload or migration is involved.
Standalone (unchanged rollback)
With CLAUDE_DESIGN_BACKEND=standalone, sync runs
claude -p "/design-sync <pre-approval>" --dangerously-skip-permissions --output-format stream-json --verbose
with the package folder as its working directory and reports what the sync uploaded. After a
successful tokens-only sync, it uses the logged-in Chrome/CDP session to replace the uploaded
styles.css import shim with the generated custom-property CSS from ds-bundle/_ds_bundle.css.
The folder must already be a package (
package.json+ a CSS entry such asstyles.css, plustokens/*.json,guidelines/*.md,README.md). Components are optional — a tokens-only package is accepted. The tool refuses before spawning ifpackage.jsonis missing.Exit status is not the success signal. A refused sync still exits
0withsubtype: "success", so the result is onlyok: truewhen the reply carries a real project link; otherwise you get{ ok: false, error, raw }with the full output for diagnosis.A first run creates the project and writes
.design-sync/config.json, which pins later runs to the same project (an unchanged re-run is then a no-op instead of a duplicate). If your pipeline regenerates the folder, snapshot.design-sync/before replacing it and restore it afterwards — this tool never writes the package itself.The prompt carries a pre-approval (
SYNC_ARGSinsrc/sync.mjs), and it is load-bearing on a first run./design-syncasks for twoAskUserQuestionconfirmations when the folder has no pin — accept the time/cost, then confirm the new project's name beforecreate_project— andclaude -phas noAskUserQuestiontool, so the turn would end with the question and upload nothing (exit0,subtype: "success", no project link). The skill's own escape hatch ("if their request already acknowledged the time/cost… continue without re-asking") is what the pre-approval invokes, and it names the fresh-project creation explicitly. A pinned re-sync never hits either gate, which is why this only ever surfaced on a first-time sync. Claude Code appends the text after the slash command to the skill body as a fenced## Hintblock, so it must stay one positional string with no triple backtick in it.A project link is necessary but not sufficient. After the link, the tool reads the remote
manifest.json(GetFile over the logged-in session) and comparesdesignSystemId,versionand the filepath/sha256list with the localmanifest.json(generatedAtis ignored). A mismatch, an unreadable remote, or a missing remote manifest on aprebuilt-*package turns the run intook: false(… — upload did not land) and skips flatten. This exists because a re-sync once compared local files only with the local manifest, declared "already in sync", and left the remote a month behind.The result adds
verified: true | false | null:true= remote manifest matches,false= the check failed (the run isok: false),null= skipped — no localmanifest.json, or a converter-shape package (.design-sync/config.jsonshapenotprebuilt-*) whose remote has no manifest (GetFile returns empty content for a missing path, and converter uploads never carry one).Failures name their cause: a DesignSync authorization refusal anywhere in the transcript becomes
DesignSync authorization is missing — run /design-login once …, and a non-zero exit oris_errorresult appends Claude's own result text (first 300 chars), e.g.claude exited with non-zero status 1: API Error: 400 … Run 'claude update'.A first sync takes ~10 minutes; unchanged re-runs take ~2. The CLI exits
1on a failed sync.The result adds
flattened: true|false. A package withoutds-bundle/styles.css(prebuilt packages author a real rootstyles.css) skips flatten with noflattenError. A post-sync browser/write failure is reported asflattenErrorwhile the completed upload remainsok: true.
With artifacts, design_system_list (CLI: list-systems) reads Design System type instances
and returns [{ name, id, publishedAt?, isDefault? }]. With standalone, claude.ai has no
separate design-systems endpoint — design systems are returned by the ordinary project list RPC
tagged PROJECT_TYPE_DESIGN_SYSTEM, which pages 20 at a time, so the tool follows every page and
returns [{ name, id, publishedAt?, viewedAt? }] (publishedAt appears only once a system has
been published). Use it to confirm what design_system_sync actually landed on the account.
scripts/probe-design-systems.mjs re-captures that live shape if the API changes.
When is a generation "done"?
For artifacts, use the Cowork result/signature mapping in Backends. The network quiet/stability behavior below applies only to standalone.
claude.ai/design drives generation as turns: your prompt streams in over a Chat RPC,
kept alive by RenewTurn keepalives (~every 10s) and ended by a ReleaseTurn. design_create /
design_iterate return once the files have settled AND the turn network has gone quiet for
CLAUDE_DESIGN_QUIET_MS — comfortably longer than the keepalive interval, so a generation is never
cut off mid-write (you always get a complete, coherent design, not a half-rendered one).
If a generation reaches its hard deadline before the quiet/stability checks complete, the result includes
timedOut: true. Normal completions omit the field entirely; treat its presence as a signal that the
returned files are the best available snapshot at the timeout rather than a fully quiet turn.
Note that claude.ai often runs an automatic refine pass that starts ~30s after the first design
settles, so the design keeps improving on the server after the tool has returned its first complete
version. To get the most-refined output, design_pull / design_preview always fetch the latest
state, or raise CLAUDE_DESIGN_QUIET_MS (e.g. 60000) to make create wait through later refine
passes (at the cost of a longer wait).
Available Tools
10 toolsdesign_createC
Create a Claude Design project and submit the initial prompt through the composer.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | No | ||
| prompt | Yes |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It mentions creating a project and submitting a prompt but does not clarify side effects, permissions, rate limits, whether the operation is synchronous, or what the response contains. This is inadequate for a creation tool.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence, which is concise but lacks necessary detail. It front-loads the purpose but fails to provide adequate information for the agent to use the tool correctly. Ideally, it should include more context without being verbose.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool has 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, error conditions, or the nature of the 'composer' reference. An agent would likely need to infer or guess many details.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 0%, but the description only implicitly covers the 'prompt' parameter. The 'name' parameter is not explained at all. The description adds no meaningful semantics beyond the parameter names in the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action 'Create a Claude Design project' and distinguishes from siblings like design_edit, design_delete. It specifies submitting the initial prompt, making the purpose specific and unambiguous.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like design_edit or design_iterate. There is no mention of prerequisites or context for usage.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
design_deleteC
Delete one Claude Design project.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| projectId | Yes |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The word 'Delete' implies a destructive action, but the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as irreversibility, permissions needed, side effects, or confirmation steps. With no annotations provided, the description fails to add transparency beyond the action itself.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single short sentence, making it concise. However, it is under-specified given the lack of details in other dimensions; brevity here comes at the cost of completeness.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple deletion tool with one parameter and no output schema or annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the effect on the project, any prerequisites, or what happens after deletion. Critical context is missing.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the 'projectId' parameter beyond its name and type. There is no indication of what values are valid or how to obtain the ID. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb 'Delete' and resource 'Claude Design project', which is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools that perform other actions like create, edit, get, etc.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives. Among 9 siblings, there is no context on prerequisites, when deletion is appropriate, or when other tools like design_edit or design_status might be relevant.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
design_editC
Apply direct string edits to one Claude Design project file.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | Yes | ||
| edits | Yes | ||
| projectId | Yes |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states that edits are applied, but fails to mention whether edits are atomic, what happens on failure, permissions required, or any side effects (e.g., overwriting existing content). The description is insufficient for understanding the tool's behavior.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single concise sentence with no superfluous information. It is front-loaded with the core action. However, it is overly terse at the expense of necessary details.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the lack of annotations, output schema, and parameter descriptions, the description is inadequate for a mutation tool. It does not provide enough context to use the tool correctly, especially regarding the format of edits and expected behavior.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema has 3 parameters (path, edits, projectId) with 0% description coverage. The description does not explain what each parameter represents or the expected format (e.g., what constitutes a valid 'edits' array). The phrase 'direct string edits' gives a vague hint but is insufficient for correct invocation.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action ('apply direct string edits') and the target resource ('one Claude Design project file'). It distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying a direct edit operation, which contrasts with create, delete, get, list, and other operations. However, the term 'string edits' is somewhat ambiguous and could be more specific.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
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 like design_create (for creating files) or design_get (for reading). There are no criteria for when edits are appropriate or any mention of prerequisites or constraints.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
design_getC
Read one file from a Claude Design project.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | Yes | ||
| projectId | Yes |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states the basic operation. It does not mention error behavior, access requirements, or other side effects.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence with no wasted words. However, it is too concise for a tool with no other documentation, sacrificing necessary detail for brevity.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Considering the large sibling set, no output schema, and lack of parameter documentation, the description is insufficient. It leaves ambiguity about file types, project structure, and return format.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 0% and the description does not add any parameter-level detail. While 'path' and 'projectId' are somewhat self-explanatory, the description fails to provide format, constraints, or relationship context.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action (read), the resource (one file), and the context (from a Claude Design project). It effectively distinguishes the tool from siblings like design_list or design_create.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any context on prerequisites or when not to use it. The description is purely functional.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
design_iterateC
Submit a follow-up prompt to an existing Claude Design project.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| prompt | Yes | ||
| projectId | Yes |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behaviors. It only says 'submit a follow-up prompt' but does not mention whether the tool modifies project state, requires authentication, or what the response contains (e.g., model reply).
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence, which is concise but severely under-specified. It lacks critical details about parameters, preconditions, and effects, making it too minimal to be effective.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With 2 required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should provide comprehensive context. It fails to explain expected input format, project lifecycle, or outcome of the submission, leaving significant gaps.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0% and the description adds no meaning to parameters. Neither 'projectId' nor 'prompt' are explained beyond their types, leaving the agent without guidance on valid values or formats.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb 'submit' and the resource 'follow-up prompt to an existing Claude Design project'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like design_create (create new) and design_edit (modify project settings) by emphasizing the iterative 'follow-up' nature.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as design_edit or design_create. It does not clarify prerequisites like the need for an existing project or that the project must have an active conversation.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
design_listA
List Claude Design projects from the logged-in web account.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Mentions 'logged-in web account' implying authentication, but no details on read-only nature, pagination, or output format. Adequate but minimal.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence, clear and front-loaded. No unnecessary words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple list tool with no output schema and no annotations, description is minimal. Lacks details on what 'projects' includes (e.g., names, IDs) and no mention of read-only nature. Acceptable but could be improved.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
No parameters exist and schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds no parameter info, but none needed.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description states 'List Claude Design projects from the logged-in web account.' Clear verb 'list' and resource 'Claude Design projects', distinguishing from siblings like design_get (single project) and design_create.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like design_get or search. Does not mention when to avoid or prerequisites, though simple tool makes it obvious.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
design_loginA
Open Chrome for claude.ai/design login and report the active account.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description discloses that it opens a browser (Chrome) and reports an account, which is a significant behavioral trait not captured in any structured fields. However, it omits details like whether this requires a desktop environment, side effects on existing sessions, or what happens if Chrome is not installed. With no annotations, the description partially fills the transparency gap.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single sentence that is front-loaded with the primary action ('Open Chrome...') and completes with the secondary action ('report...'). Every word is necessary and there is no wasted text.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple tool with no output schema, the description communicates the core function but lacks details on the format of the reported account (e.g., string, JSON), potential user interaction required, or failure modes. It is minimally complete but could be more informative.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool has zero parameters, so the input schema is trivially covered (100%). The description does not need to add parameter details. Per guidelines, 0 parameters baseline is 4, and the description meets that without superfluous information.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool opens Chrome for a specific login page (claude.ai/design) and reports the active account. It uses strong verbs 'Open' and 'report', and the resource is explicitly a login operation, which distinctly separates it from sibling tools focused on design CRUD.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like design_get or design_list. There is no mention of prerequisites, ordering (e.g., must be called before design operations), or 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.
design_previewC
Render a project's self-contained HTML to a full-page PNG screenshot for visual review.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| dir | No | ||
| name | No | ||
| path | No | ||
| width | No | ||
| height | No | ||
| projectId | No |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It indicates a read-only operation but does not mention that it is non-destructive, any authentication requirements, or whether it modifies state. The term 'self-contained HTML' is not explained.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, clear sentence with no verbosity. However, it could be slightly more structured with additional context without losing conciseness.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the complexity of 6 optional parameters, no output schema, and no behavioral details, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain how parameters like width, height, or projectId affect the output, nor what a 'full-page PNG screenshot' entails.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema has 6 parameters with 0% coverage (no descriptions). The description does not mention any parameters or their purpose, failing to add value beyond the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's function: rendering HTML to a PNG screenshot for visual review. It uses a specific verb ('Render') and resource ('project's self-contained HTML'), distinguishing it from sibling tools that perform CRUD operations.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as design_get or design_list. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or 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.
design_pullC
Pull one Claude Design project by projectId or exact name into a local directory.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| dir | No | ||
| zip | No | ||
| name | No | ||
| projectId | No |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the action but not behavioral traits such as whether the operation is destructive, if it overwrites local files, authentication requirements, or error handling. Without this, an agent cannot predict side effects.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence with no fluff, clearly stating the core functionality. It could be slightly more structured, but it is efficient and front-loaded.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool has 4 parameters (none required), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It should include details on default behavior, output format, error conditions, and parameter interactions to enable proper invocation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains projectId and name as identifiers, but does not describe the 'dir' parameter (output directory) or 'zip' parameter (whether to create a zip file). This leaves agent uncertain about required or optional parameters.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action ('Pull') and the resource ('Claude Design project'), and specifies two methods for identifying the project (projectId or exact name). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like design_get, which might also retrieve project data.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., design_get, design_list). The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or cases where other tools would be more appropriate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
design_statusC
Summarize project data, chat count, and last message role.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| projectId | Yes |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. Only states 'summarize' without disclosing read-only nature, authentication needs, or output format. Does not indicate whether the tool has side effects.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence is highly concise with no extraneous words. However, it may be overly brief; a bit more structure could improve clarity without sacrificing conciseness.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the complexity of summarizing project data, chat counts, and last message roles, and the lack of output schema or additional annotations, the description leaves significant gaps in understanding what is returned and how to interpret results.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 0% for the single parameter projectId. The description mentions 'project data' but does not explain what projectId represents or how it should be used. Fails to add meaning beyond the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb 'Summarize' and identifies distinct resource aspects: 'project data, chat count, and last message role'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like design_get (which likely returns full design details) or design_list (which lists multiple designs).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as design_get or design_list. Lacks context for appropriate usage scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
10 tool updates
v0.1.0- First observed
design_create - First observed
design_delete - First observed
design_edit - First observed
design_get - First observed
design_iterate - First observed
design_list - First observed
design_login - First observed
design_preview - First observed
design_pull - First observed
design_status
TDQS
Scored across 10 tools
Each tool has a unique action (create, delete, edit, get, iterate, list, login, preview, pull, status) targeting distinct operations on projects or files, with no overlap in purpose.
All tools follow a uniform 'design_<verb>' pattern, using snake_case throughout, making naming predictable and easy to understand.
10 tools is well-scoped for a design-related server, covering essential operations from login to CRUD to preview and status without being excessive or insufficient.
The tool set covers core workflows (login, list, create, read, update, delete, preview, pull), but lacks explicit support for file deletion or project metadata updates, which are minor gaps.
Maintenance
Related MCP Connectors
- WhoogyOAuthcom.whoogy
Compare Figma designs against live websites and get visual + content QA reports, from inside Claude.
Read, edit, publish, and preview your pepita websites from Claude.
Provides cloud browser automation capabilities using Stagehand and Browserbase, enabling LLMs to i…
Run UX research from Claude — create card sort studies, list studies, pull headline stats.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceEnables automation of browser tasks using Playwright by interacting via Claude Desktop for executing user-defined prompts and operations.12289 npm12MIT
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol (MCP) integration that provides Claude Desktop with autonomous browser automation capabilities. This agent enables Claude to interact with web content, manipulate DOM elements, execute JavaScript, and perform API requests.1316 npm41TypeScriptMozilla Public 2.0
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables natural language browser automation through Claude, wrapping Playwright to execute commands like navigation, clicking, form filling, and screenshots.5 npm30MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceLets Claude Code drive your own Chrome browser with human-like clicks, drags, and typing. It uses your real sessions and logins, and pauses for your confirmation on anything irreversible.8MIT