Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
next-ui-mcp

next-ui-mcp

by dylanlindgren
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

explain_now_ui_manifest

Explains how now-ui.json declares component properties and dispatched events, and why every source property or event must match the manifest before you create or edit a component.

Instructions

Explains what now-ui.json is for in a ServiceNow Now/Next Experience UI Framework component project, and the rule that every property and dispatched event in a component's source must have a matching declaration in now-ui.json. Read this before creating or editing a component if you are unsure whether the manifest needs updating too.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "explain_now_ui_manifest"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.2.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only informational tool but does not state side effects, permissions, or that it returns static explanatory text. Adequate but not rich behavioral disclosure.

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?

Two tightly written sentences with purpose front-loaded. Every sentence earns its place: the first defines the tool's scope, the second gives a usage trigger.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers what it explains, the underlying rule, and when to consult it. It could mention that the output is a static explanation, but otherwise it is complete enough.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description appropriately adds no parameter detail because none exist.

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?

States a specific verb ('Explains') and resource ('now-ui.json'), plus the rule it covers. It is clearly explanatory rather than a validation tool like validate_now_ui_manifest, but does not explicitly name or contrast with any sibling.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Provides a clear trigger: 'Read this before creating or editing a component if you are unsure whether the manifest needs updating too.' Gives context for use but no explicit exclusions or named alternatives.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools