ui-optimizer-mcp
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| UI_OPTIMIZER_OUTPUT_DIR | No | Optional output directory for artifacts. | artifacts |
| UI_OPTIMIZER_TIMEOUT_MS | No | Optional timeout in milliseconds for operations. | 30000 |
| UI_OPTIMIZER_MAX_SIGNAL_ITEMS | No | Optional maximum number of signal items to include. | 40 |
| UI_OPTIMIZER_MAX_VISIBLE_ELEMENTS | No | Optional maximum number of visible elements to process. | 300 |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| scan_website_uiA | Open a URL with Playwright, capture screenshots and DOM metadata, run deterministic UI checks, and return a structured optimization report and follow-up prompt. |
| generate_ui_fix_promptB | Generate a concise Claude Code prompt summary from an existing optimization report. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools have clearly distinct inputs and purposes: one scans a live URL and produces a report, the other consumes an existing report to produce a prompt. There is no realistic overlap or ambiguity between them.
Both tool names follow the same verb_noun pattern with snake_case convention: scan_website_ui and generate_ui_fix_prompt. Naming is perfectly consistent.
With only two tools, the server feels quite thin for a 'ui-optimizer' domain. The tools support a narrow scan-and-prompt workflow, but the count is on the low end and could warrant a few more related operations.
The workflow of scanning a website and generating a fix prompt is functionally complete for the server's stated purpose. Minor gaps exist such as lacking a way to import external reports or apply fixes directly, but the core flow is not broken.