Skip to main content
Glama
drumst0ck

Uploadkit

by drumst0ck
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersScoreDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

get_component

Retrieve full metadata and a copy-pasteable React usage example for any UploadKit component by providing its PascalCase name. Returns usage with import lines and styles.css import.

Instructions

Fetch full metadata plus a ready-to-paste React usage example for one specific UploadKit component.

When to use: once you know the exact component name (from list_components or search_components) and need to show the user how to drop it into their code. The returned "usage" field is copy-pasteable TSX including the correct import line and the styles.css import.

Returns: JSON { name, category, description, inspiration, usage }. If the name does not match any component, returns a suggestion message with the 5 closest matches. Read-only, idempotent.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesExact PascalCase component name. Case-sensitive. Examples: "UploadDropzone", "UploadDropzoneAurora", "UploadProgressRadial", "UploadDataStream". Must match one of the names returned by list_components.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Previous value: -"Exact component name, e.g. \"UploadDropzoneAurora\"."New value: +"Exact PascalCase component name. Case-sensitive. Examples: \"UploadDropzone\", \"UploadDropzoneAurora\", \"UploadProgressRadial\", \"UploadDataStream\". Must match one of the names returned by list_components."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses read-only, idempotent behavior, the exact JSON return shape, and the fallback suggestion message for unmatched names. This goes beyond minimal expectations, though it could mention explicit side-effect absence.

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 tightly written with a logical flow: purpose, when-to-use, return format, and error behavior. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

This is a simple single-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, and the description covers all necessary context: what it returns, how to use it, error handling, and safety. No significant information gaps remain.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema already provides thorough parameter details (case-sensitive, PascalCase, examples), and the description adds contextual guidance on sourcing the name from list_components or search_components. This enhances the parameter's meaning beyond the schema alone.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool fetches full metadata and a copy-pasteable React usage example for one specific UploadKit component. It distinguishes from sibling listing/searching tools by specifying 'one specific' and referencing how to obtain the exact name.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description includes an explicit 'When to use' section: once the exact component name is known from list_components or search_components and a ready-to-paste example is needed. This clearly differentiates when to use this tool over alternatives.

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