Skip to main content
Glama

get_component_developer_notes

Retrieve developer implementation notes for accessibility components, including code examples, WCAG mappings, and technical guidance for web or native platforms.

Instructions

Get developer implementation notes for a component. Includes code examples, WCAG mappings, and technical guidance.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
platformYesPlatform (web or native)
componentYesComponent name (e.g., "button", "checkbox")

Implementation Reference

  • Primary handler function that executes the tool logic: fetches developer notes via ContentLoader for the specified platform and component, returns as MCP text content, handles errors with suggestions and available formats.
    async function handleGetComponentDeveloperNotes(args: any) {
      try {
        const content = await contentLoader.getComponentContent(args.platform, args.component, 'developerNotes');
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: 'text',
              text: content,
            },
          ],
        };
      } catch (error: any) {
        const suggestions = contentLoader.getSimilarComponents(args.platform, args.component);
        const formats = contentLoader.getAvailableFormats(args.platform, args.component);
    
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: 'text',
              text: JSON.stringify(
                {
                  error: error.message,
                  component: args.component,
                  suggestions,
                  availableFormats: formats,
                },
                null,
                2
              ),
            },
          ],
          isError: true,
        };
      }
  • Tool schema definition including name, description, and input schema requiring 'platform' (web/native) and 'component'.
    {
      name: 'get_component_developer_notes',
      description: 'Get developer implementation notes for a component. Includes code examples, WCAG mappings, and technical guidance.',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          platform: {
            type: 'string',
            enum: ['web', 'native'],
            description: 'Platform (web or native)',
          },
          component: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'Component name (e.g., "button", "checkbox")',
          },
        },
        required: ['platform', 'component'],
      },
    },
  • src/index.ts:66-67 (registration)
    Registration in the MCP CallToolRequestSchema handler switch statement, delegating to the handler function.
    case 'get_component_developer_notes':
      return await handleGetComponentDeveloperNotes(args);
  • Inline handler for the Netlify HTTP deployment, simplified version fetching and returning developer notes content.
    case 'get_component_developer_notes': {
      const content = await contentLoader.getComponentContent(args.platform, args.component, 'developerNotes');
      return { content: [{ type: 'text', text: content }] };
  • Tool registration and inline handling in the Netlify api.js switch for HTTP MCP transport.
    case 'get_component_developer_notes': {
      const content = await contentLoader.getComponentContent(args.platform, args.component, 'developerNotes');
      return { content: [{ type: 'text', text: content }] };
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions what content is included (code examples, WCAG mappings, technical guidance), which adds some behavioral context beyond the basic 'get' operation. However, it lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or response format, which are important for a tool with no output schema.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by a concise list of included content types. Both sentences earn their place by adding value without redundancy, making it efficient and well-structured.

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?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description provides basic purpose and content types but lacks completeness for a tool with two required parameters and multiple siblings. It doesn't clarify differences from similar tools (e.g., get_component_native_notes) or detail output structure, leaving gaps in contextual understanding.

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 description coverage is 100%, with both parameters clearly documented in the schema (platform with enum values, component with examples). The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining how component names are formatted or platform implications. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

The description clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('developer implementation notes for a component'), specifying what the tool does. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on developer notes rather than other component data types like condensed views or Gherkin specifications, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage context by mentioning 'developer implementation notes' and listing content types (code examples, WCAG mappings, technical guidance), suggesting it's for technical/development purposes. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus sibling tools like get_component_native_notes or get_web_component, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites.

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

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/joe-watkins/magentaa11y-mcp-remote'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server