Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
web-ui-component-spec-mcp

web-ui-component-spec-mcp

by gcsebas99
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_component_spec

Retrieve the complete behavioral specification for any UI component, including features, accessibility, and implementation notes, to guide component implementation from scratch.

Instructions

Return the full behavioral specification for a single component. Includes description, all main features, secondary features (accessibility, keyboard navigation, touch, responsive, i18n, etc.), and implementation notes. Use this when implementing a component from scratch.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "component": "<component>"
    },
    "name": "get_component_spec"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
componentYesComponent name (e.g. 'Modal', 'Text Input', 'Button') or numeric id (e.g. '46', '19', '16')

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.2

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided; description lists included content but does not disclose behavioral traits like idempotency or 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.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then content list and usage. No wasted words.

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

Completeness3/5

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

No output schema; description lists included sections but not structure or format, leaving agents to infer return type.

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 coverage is 100% for the single parameter, but description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's own description.

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 returns the full behavioral specification for a single component, distinguishing it from siblings like summaries or tests.

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?

Explicitly advises using this tool when implementing a component from scratch, though lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative guidance.

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