Skip to main content
Glama
deenesjakoptruzh
tabaldi98

bunge-ds-mcp

by tabaldi98
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Local

bunge-ds-mcp

MCP (Model Context Protocol) server that exposes the @bunge/ds-components design system catalog. It allows AI assistants to list, search, and retrieve full component details — including inputs, outputs, usage examples, and import instructions.

The server communicates via stdio (it does not expose an HTTP port). Communication happens through the process itself, integrated directly into the MCP client (e.g., VS Code Copilot).

Tools

Tool

Description

list-components

Lists all available components, with an optional filter by category (form, layout, navigation, feedback, data-display, overlay)

get-component

Returns full details of a component by ID (inputs, outputs, usage, import)

search-components

Searches for components by name, description, or tags

get-component-usage

Returns usage examples and import instructions for a component

How to start

Prerequisites

  • Node.js 18+

  • npm 9+

Installation and build

npm install
npm run build

Run locally

npm start

The server starts via stdio — there is no HTTP port. It is consumed by MCP clients that connect to the process directly.

Configuration in the MCP client (e.g., VS Code)

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "bunge-ds-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["bunge-ds-mcp"]
    }
  }
}

Or pointing to the local build:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "bunge-ds-mcp": {
      "command": "node",
      "args": ["dist/index.js"]
    }
  }
}

package.json scripts

Script

Command

Description

build

tsc

Compiles TypeScript to JavaScript in the dist/ folder

start

node dist/index.js

Starts the MCP server (requires prior build)

dev

tsc --watch

Compiles in watch mode — recompiles automatically on every change

dev:inspect

tsc && npx @modelcontextprotocol/inspector node dist/index.js

Compiles and opens the MCP Inspector to test tools interactively

test

vitest run

Runs unit tests once

test:watch

vitest

Runs tests in watch mode

docker:infra:up

docker compose up -d --wait

Starts Verdaccio (private npm registry) on port 4873

docker:infra:down

docker compose down

Stops and removes the Verdaccio container

registry:login:private

npm login --registry http://localhost:4873

Logs in to the local private registry (Verdaccio)

release:private

npm version patch && npm publish --registry http://localhost:4873

Increments the version (patch) and publishes to the local private registry

Local infrastructure (Docker)

The docker-compose.yaml starts a Verdaccio — a private npm registry — on port 4873 (http://localhost:4873). Used to simulate package publication without sending it to the public npm.

npm run docker:infra:up    # sobe o Verdaccio
npm run registry:login:private  # autentica no registry local
npm run release:private    # publica o pacote localmente

Project structure

src/
├── index.ts              # Entrada: cria o McpServer e conecta ao transport
├── tools/                # Registro das tools (uma por arquivo)
│   ├── index.ts          # Barrel — registra todas as tools
│   ├── list-components.ts
│   ├── get-component.ts
│   ├── search-components.ts
│   └── get-component-usage.ts
├── data/
│   └── components.ts     # Catálogo de componentes do DS
├── models/
│   └── mcp-server.model.ts  # Interfaces e tipos
└── tests/
    ├── data.spec.ts
    └── tools.spec.ts

Available Tools

4 tools
get-componentA

Retorna detalhes completos de um componente: inputs, outputs, exemplos de uso e import.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesID do componente (ex: "button", "list")

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavior. It only states what is returned, but does not mention potential errors, authentication, rate limits, or side effects. For a read operation, basic behavioral transparency is missing.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and return value. It is front-loaded with the key action and resource.

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?

Given no output schema, the description adequately lists the types of details returned (inputs, outputs, usage examples, import). Missing error handling or scope details, but sufficient for a simple fetch tool.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for the single parameter 'id'. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema example. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema covers the parameter.

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 verb 'retorna' and the resource 'detalhes completos de um componente', specifying the content: inputs, outputs, usage examples, and import. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list-components and search-components.

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 use for fetching full details of a specific component, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives or when not to use. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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

get-component-usageB

Retorna exemplos de uso e instruções de import de um componente.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesID do componente (ex: "button", "list")

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided. The description only states what it returns, but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as whether it is safe, requires authentication, or has 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.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single, concise sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's purpose with no extraneous information.

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 description is adequate for a simple tool with one parameter, but lacks details about the return format or structure of the usage examples and import instructions. Could be more complete given there is no output schema.

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% (the 'id' parameter has a clear description in the schema). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, earning the baseline score of 3.

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 it returns usage examples and import instructions for a component (specific verb and resource). It distinguishes from siblings like 'get-component' (which likely returns component details), 'list-components', and 'search-components'.

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 alternatives. It does not provide any context about prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions.

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

list-componentsA

Lista todos os componentes disponíveis no Design System, com filtro opcional por categoria.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
categoryNoFiltrar componentes por categoria

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses basic behavior (list components, filter) but does not mention return format, pagination, or potential 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.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single concise sentence that front-loads the purpose and includes the optional filter, with no unnecessary words.

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 simple list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate but does not describe return value structure or other contextual 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 description restates the category filter already documented in the schema, adding no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides. Schema coverage is 100%.

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 lists all available components in the Design System with an optional category filter, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get-component (single component) and search-components (search).

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 use for listing with optional filtering but does not explicitly contrast with siblings or provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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

search-componentsA

Busca componentes por nome, descrição ou tags.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesTermo de busca para encontrar componentes

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the search fields (name, description, tags) but omits details like case sensitivity, partial matching, pagination, or read-only nature. This is insufficient for a search tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the core purpose. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool with one parameter, though it could include brief behavioral notes.

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 no output schema and simple parameters, the description is minimally adequate but lacks details on return format, pagination, or matching behavior. It covers the essential 'what' but not the 'how' of results.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema covers the single parameter with a description ('search term'), and the description adds value by specifying the fields searched (name, description, tags). This extra context helps the agent understand what the query matches against.

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 action (search) and the resource (components) with the scope (by name, description, or tags). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list-components (which lists all) and get-component (single component retrieval).

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?

The description implies usage context: use this tool when searching components by specific terms. While it does not explicitly mention alternatives, the sibling tool names (list-components, get-component) naturally differentiate the use cases.

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

Install Server
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

The tools have distinct purposes, but get-component-usage is a subset of get-component, potentially causing minor confusion. Descriptions help differentiate, so overall good.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (get-, list-, search-), making them predictable and easy to understand.

Tool Count5/5

With 4 tools, the set is well-scoped for browsing a design system, covering listing, searching, and retrieving details without being excessive.

Completeness5/5

The tools provide full coverage for component browsing: list with filter, search, full details, and usage info. No obvious gaps in this domain.

Resources

Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.

Looking for Admin?

If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.

Related MCP Connectors

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/tabaldi98/mvp-for-ds-components-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server