Skip to main content
Glama
deenesjakoruzh
SeeYangZhi

heroicons-mcp

by SeeYangZhi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

heroicons-mcp

Ask DeepWiki

A Model Context Protocol (MCP) server exposing Heroicons as resources and tools for LLMs and agentic applications. Built with Bun and the MCP TypeScript SDK.

What is Heroicons?

Heroicons is a popular library of hand-crafted SVG icons, designed by the makers of Tailwind CSS. The icons are available in multiple styles (Outline, Solid) and are easy to integrate into web projects.

Related MCP server: SupaUI MCP Server

What is MCP?

The Model Context Protocol (MCP) is a standard for AI tools to request specific context from sources outside their main training data.

This MCP server allows AI coding assistants and other agentic applications to access information about Heroicons, enabling better assistance and icon search capabilities.

Features

  • Exposes Heroicons as MCP resources (Outline and Solid styles)

  • Provides tools for searching icons by name or keywords

  • Allows listing all icons or icons within a specific style

  • Ready for integration with Claude Desktop and other MCP clients

  • Can be run as an HTTP server or a stdio-based MCP server

Prerequisites

Getting Started (Development)

1. Clone the repository

git clone https://github.com/SeeYangZhi/heroicons-mcp.git
cd heroicons-mcp

2. Install Bun (if you don't have it)

Refer to the official Bun installation guide.
After installation, restart your terminal and check:

bun --version

3. Install dependencies

bun install

4. Build the project

This compiles the TypeScript source to JavaScript in the build directory.

bun run build

Usage

HTTP Mode

You can run the HTTP server using npx:

npx heroicons-mcp

This starts the HTTP server (defaults to port 3000, as defined in src/http.ts).

Or install globally:

npm install -g heroicons-mcp

Then run:

heroicons-mcp

Stdio Mode

npx heroicons-mcp --stdio
# or if installed globally
heroicons-mcp --stdio

Local Development

There are two main ways to run the MCP server:

1. HTTP Mode

Suitable for clients that support communication over HTTP.

For development (using Bun):

bun run start
# or directly
bun run src/entry.ts

This runs the server defined in src/entry.ts, which defaults to HTTP mode.

2. Stdio Mode

Often used for direct integration with tools like Claude Desktop or the MCP Inspector, communicating over standard input/output.

For development (using Bun):

bun run src/entry.ts --stdio

Configuration with AI Tools

Example: Claude Desktop

To use this MCP server in Claude Desktop:

  1. Open your Claude Desktop configuration file:

code ~/Library/Application\ Support/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json

(Or use your preferred editor) 2. Add the server to the mcpServers section.

Option A: via npx:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "heroicons": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["heroicons-mcp", "--stdio"]
    }
  }
}

Option B: Pointing directly to the build output (ensure you have built the project using bun run build):

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "heroicons": {
      "command": "node",
      "args": ["/ABSOLUTE/PATH/TO/heroicons-mcp/build/entry.js", "--stdio"]
    }
  }
}

Replace /ABSOLUTE/PATH/TO/heroicons-mcp/build/entry.js with the actual absolute path to your built entry.js file.

  1. Save the file and restart Claude Desktop.

  2. You should now see the "heroicons" server available in Claude's tools panel.

Note: The npx heroicons-mcp --stdio command is the recommended way for stdio mode.

Tools Available (MCP)

This MCP server exposes the following tools to AI coding assistants:

  1. list_all_icons

  • Description: Lists all available Heroicons, optionally filtered by style (outline, solid).

  • Parameters: style (optional: "outline" | "solid")

  1. search_icons

  • Description: Searches for Heroicons by name or keywords across all styles.

  • Parameters: query (string), style (optional: "outline" | "solid")

  1. get_icon_usage_examples

  • Description: Retrieves JSX example usage for a specific icon.

  • Parameters: name (string), style (string: "outline" | "solid")

Example Usage

Here's how an AI tool might use this MCP server:

  1. User asks AI tool: "Find me a 'user' icon from Heroicons, preferably the solid style."

  2. AI tool calls search_icons:

  • query: "user"

  • style: "solid"

  1. MCP server responds with a list of matching solid Heroicons (e.g., UserIcon, UserCircleIcon, UserPlusIcon).

  2. User asks tool: "Show usage example of UserIcon".

  3. AI tool calls get_icon_usage_examples:

  • name: "UserIcon"

  • style: "solid"

  1. MCP server responds with the JSX code example:

import { UserIcon } from "@heroicons/react/24/solid";

function Example() {
  return (
    <div>
      <UserIcon className="w-6 h-6 text-blue-500" />
    </div>
  );
}

Testing MCP Locally with Inspector

You can test the MCP server (stdio mode) locally using the MCP Inspector.

First, ensure the project is built:

bun run build

Then launch the Inspector and connect it to your server using the node ./build/entry.js command with the --stdio flag:

npx @modelcontextprotocol/inspector node ./build/entry.js --stdio

This will open the Inspector interface, allowing you to interactively test resources and tools exposed by your MCP server.

Development Scripts

  • bun run dev: Starts the server in HTTP mode for development (uses src/entry.ts).

  • bun run dev:stdio: Starts the stdio MCP server for development (uses src/entry.ts --stdio).

  • bun run build: Compiles TypeScript to JavaScript (output in build/).

  • bun run lint: Lints the codebase using ESLint.

Resources

License

MIT

Available Tools

3 tools
get_icon_usage_examplesB

Get usage examples for an icon

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesIcon component name, e.g. BeakerIcon
styleYesIcon style: solid or outline

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states what the tool does but does not reveal any behavioral traits such as whether it's a read-only operation, potential rate limits, error conditions, or the format of returned examples. For a tool with no annotations, this is a significant gap, warranting a score of 2.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and wastes no space, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly. This optimal conciseness earns a score of 5.

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 the tool's moderate complexity (2 required parameters) and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose but lacks details on behavioral traits, usage context, and output format, which are important for an agent to use the tool effectively. Without annotations or an output schema, the description should do more, resulting in a score of 3.

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 description coverage is 100%, with clear descriptions for both parameters ('name' and 'style'), including an enum for 'style'. The description does not add any meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining how 'name' relates to icon components or providing examples of usage. Given the high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the resource 'usage examples for an icon', making the purpose understandable. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_all_icons' or 'search_icons', which might also involve icons but serve different functions. This clarity without sibling distinction justifies a score of 4.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'list_all_icons' or 'search_icons'. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage based on the tool name alone. This lack of explicit guidelines results in a score of 2.

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

list_all_iconsB

List all icons from the heroicons library, optionally filtered by style

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
styleNoIcon style: solid or outline (optional)

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 carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions listing and optional filtering but doesn't describe key behaviors such as pagination, rate limits, authentication requirements, or what the output format looks like (e.g., list of icon names, metadata). For a tool with no annotations, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how it operates.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('List all icons from the heroicons library') and adds an optional feature ('optionally filtered by style'). There is no wasted text, and it's appropriately sized for a 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?

Given the tool's low complexity (1 optional parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose and parameter intent but lacks details on behavioral aspects like output format or usage constraints. For a listing tool, this is borderline acceptable but could be improved with more context.

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 the single parameter 'style' fully documented in the schema (including enum values 'solid' or 'outline'). The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by mentioning 'optionally filtered by style', which aligns with the schema but doesn't provide additional context like default behavior if omitted or how filtering is applied.

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 'List' and resource 'all icons from the heroicons library', which provides a specific purpose. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'search_icons' or 'get_icon_usage_examples', which likely have different functions (searching vs listing, or getting usage examples vs listing icons).

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 by mentioning 'optionally filtered by style', suggesting this tool is for listing icons with optional style filtering. However, it doesn't provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_icons' (which might allow more complex queries) or 'get_icon_usage_examples' (which focuses on examples rather than listing).

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

search_iconsB

Search for icons from heroicons by name or category

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
categoryNoCategory to filter by (optional)
limitNoMax results to return
queryYesSearch term for icon name or category
styleNoIcon style: solid or outline

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but lacks behavioral details. It doesn't mention rate limits, authentication needs, response format, pagination, or error handling. The description only states the basic functionality without operational context.

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, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for this tool's complexity and front-loads the core functionality without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

For a search tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose but lacks details about return values, error conditions, and behavioral constraints that would be helpful for an AI agent.

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%, so the schema fully documents all parameters. The description adds minimal value by mentioning 'name or category' search, which aligns with the 'query' parameter but doesn't provide additional semantic context beyond what's in the schema.

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 action ('Search for icons') and resource ('from heroicons'), specifying the search scope ('by name or category'). It distinguishes from 'list_all_icons' by implying filtering, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'get_icon_usage_examples'.

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 on when to use this tool versus siblings is provided. The description implies filtering capabilities but doesn't specify scenarios where search_icons is preferred over list_all_icons or get_icon_usage_examples.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 3 tool updatesv1.0.0
    • First observedget_icon_usage_examples
    • First observedlist_all_icons
    • First observedsearch_icons
Deploy Server
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Scored across 3 tools

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: listing all icons, searching icons by criteria, and getting usage examples for a specific icon. There is no overlap in functionality, making it easy for an agent to select the right tool without confusion.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (get_icon_usage_examples, list_all_icons, search_icons) with clear, descriptive verbs. The naming is uniform and predictable across the set.

Tool Count5/5

With 3 tools, this server is well-scoped for its purpose of accessing a heroicons library. Each tool serves a distinct and essential function, making the count appropriate without being too thin or heavy.

Completeness5/5

The tool set provides complete coverage for the domain: listing icons, searching icons, and getting usage examples. This covers the core workflows for accessing and utilizing an icon library, with no obvious gaps or dead ends.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

  • hugeicons-mcp

    hugeicons
    A
    license
    A
    quality
    F
    maintenance
    MCP server for Hugeicons integration and documentation This is a TypeScript-based MCP server that provides tools and resources for integrating Hugeicons into various platforms. It implements a Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that helps AI assistants provide accurate guidance for using Hugeicons
    5
    970 npm
    26
    MIT

  • PickAPIcon MCP

    Leee62
    A
    license
    B
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    MCP server that allows FE/UI/Designers to retrieve SVG icons via the Iconify API by simply asking LLMs rather than manually searching websites.
    3
    17 npm
    4
    MIT