Retrieve a screen's raw HTML code from a Stitch project. Use it to analyze or generate code from design screens.
Retrieves the HTML code content of a screen. Returns the raw HTML that can be used for code generation or analysis.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| screenId | Yes | The screen ID. | |
| projectId | Yes | The Stitch project ID. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description states the return type (raw HTML) and implies read-only behavior via 'Retrieves'. With no annotations, this is adequate but minimal – it doesn't disclose potential limitations like whether the HTML is full document or fragment, or any 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences with no wasted words. The core action and return value are front-loaded, making it immediately scannable and efficient.
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 simple retrieval tool, the description covers purpose, resource, and return value. It lacks usage guidance and edge-case behavior, but the schema fully documents parameters and the tool's simplicity reduces the need for extensive context.
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% for both parameters, so the schema carries the parameter meaning. The description adds no additional context about parameter semantics beyond what is already in the schema.
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?
Description uses a specific verb ('Retrieves') and resource ('HTML code content of a screen'), and clarifies the output is 'raw HTML'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_screen_image or screen_to_react without ambiguity.
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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The phrase 'for code generation or analysis' hints at context but doesn't compare against siblings like screen_to_react or get_screen, nor states when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.