Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Wechat Devtools MCP

Wechat Devtools MCP

by pureia
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

element_style

Get the computed style value (e.g., color, fontSize) of a page element in a WeChat Mini Program by specifying its element ID and the style property name.

Instructions

获取元素样式值（如 color / fontSize）

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": {
      "element_id": "<element_id>",
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "element_style"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes样式名，如 color / fontSize
element_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.0.2

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description itself must disclose behavior. It only indicates a read operation ('get') but does not mention return format, behavior on missing styles, or whether it returns computed or inline styles. This is a minimal disclosure.

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 concise sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized for the simple tool.

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?

The tool has a simple 2-parameter schema, but with no output schema or annotations, the description could benefit from noting the return type or edge cases. It covers the core purpose but omits behavioral details.

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?

The schema already describes the 'name' parameter with examples, and the description repeats those examples. The 'element_id' parameter is left undefined in both schema and description, though its purpose is inferable from the tool name. Overall, the description adds little beyond the schema.

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 retrieves element style values, with examples ('color', 'fontSize'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like element_attribute (attributes) and element_property (properties).

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as element_attribute or element_property. The description only states what it does, not when to prefer it.

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