OriginUI MCP Server

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states it lists components with basic information. It doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as pagination, rate limits, authentication needs, or what 'basic information' entails, leaving significant gaps for a read operation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to understand at a glance.

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

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

For a read operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It lacks details on output format, error handling, or behavioral context, which could hinder an AI agent's ability to use it effectively without additional information.

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

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents the two parameters (category and limit). The description doesn't add any meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining how filtering works or default behaviors, but this is acceptable given the high schema coverage.

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

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

The description clearly states the action ('List') and resource ('OriginUI components'), specifying that it provides 'basic information'. However, it doesn't differentiate from siblings like 'search_components' or 'get_registry_stats' that might also list components in different ways.

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

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_components' or 'get_component_details'. The description implies a comprehensive listing but doesn't specify if this is for browsing, filtering, or other contexts.

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