Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-server-nuxt

mcp-server-nuxt

by rynx-cc
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

get_auto_imports

Read the Nuxt auto-imports registry to list every auto-imported symbol with its source path and type signature, so you can avoid guessing imports. Requires a prepared or built project.

Instructions

Read the .nuxt/imports.d.ts auto-imports registry: every auto-imported symbol with its source path and type signature. Requires the project to have been prepared/built. Use this instead of guessing import paths or function signatures.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_auto_imports"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filterNoOptional substring filter on the symbol name or source path

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full load and does so well: it signals read-only intent ('Read'), discloses the build/preparation prerequisite, and states what the response contains. It does not say what happens if the registry file is missing, which is the main remaining gap.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with what is read and what it returns, followed by prerequisite and guidance. No filler or repetition.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, returned content, prerequisite, and use case. Only failure behavior when the project has not been built is left implicit.

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 single 'filter' parameter is fully documented in the schema (100% coverage), so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description says nothing about filtering, which is acceptable under high schema coverage but adds no extra meaning.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource (read the .nuxt/imports.d.ts auto-imports registry) and specifies the payload: every auto-imported symbol with source path and type signature. It is distinguishable from siblings like get_type_info or search_code, though it never names an alternative directly.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives a clear positive trigger ('use this instead of guessing import paths or function signatures') and a prerequisite ('project must have been prepared/built'). It stops short of naming explicit alternatives or when-not conditions, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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