Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
stitch-bridge

stitch-bridge

by jlhernando
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

generate_screen

Turn a text prompt into a UI screen with a unique ID and full HTML. Set project, model, and device type to generate the interface.

Instructions

Generate a new UI screen from a text prompt. Returns the screen ID and full HTML content.

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": {
      "projectId": "<projectId>",
      "prompt": "<prompt>"
    },
    "name": "generate_screen"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
promptYesDesign prompt describing the desired UI
modelIdNoModel to use for generation (default: GEMINI_3_FLASH)
projectIdYesProject ID to generate screen in
deviceTypeNoTarget device type (default: DESKTOP)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does state the return value ('screen ID and full HTML content') and implies a creation action ('Generate a new UI screen'), but it does not disclose side effects, persistence, auth requirements, or rate limits. This is adequate but not rich.

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 a single sentence, front-loaded with the core action, and efficiently includes the return value. Every word earns its place.

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?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description is fairly complete: it explains what the tool does and what it returns. The schema covers all parameters, including defaults for enums. Minor gaps like side effects are present but not critical for a simple generation tool.

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%, and the description does not need to repeat parameter details. It adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 is 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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Generate a new UI screen from a text prompt.' It uses a specific verb ('Generate') and resource ('UI screen'), and the word 'new' distinguishes it from sibling tools like edit_screen and generate_variants.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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 such as edit_screen, generate_variants, or build_site. It lacks any 'when to use' or 'when not to use' context.

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