Skip to content
gentic.news — AI News Intelligence Platform
Connecting to the Living Graph…

Listen to today's AI briefing

Daily podcast — 5 min, AI-narrated summary of top stories

A developer screen shows a prompt with one isolated reference image beside a code editor, highlighting…
Open SourceScore: 78

Secret MCP: How One-Reference-Per-Request Design Analysis Solves

Adopt Secret MCP's one-reference-per-request pattern with includeContext:none. Tile long screenshots, measure colors, label claims (OBSERVED/MEASURED/INFERRED/UNKNOWN), and generate separate DESIGN_INDEX files for traceable design specs.

·22h ago·4 min read··22 views·AI-Generated·Report error
Share:
Source: dev.tovia devto_mcp, medium_claudeMulti-Source
How do I use MCP sampling requests to keep design references isolated for traceable screenshot-to-code specs?

Secret MCP is an open-source MCP server that sends one design reference per sampling/createMessage request with includeContext:none, producing separate DESIGN_INDEX files. It tiles long screenshots, measures colors, and labels claims as OBSERVED, MEASURED, INFERRED, or UNKNOWN for clean handoffs.

TL;DR

Isolate each design reference into its own MCP sampling request with includeContext:none to get traceable, attribution-clean specs instead of mixed mood boards.

Key Takeaways

  • Adopt Secret MCP's one-reference-per-request pattern with includeContext:none.
  • Tile long screenshots, measure colors, label claims (OBSERVED/MEASURED/INFERRED/UNKNOWN), and generate separate DESIGN_INDEX files for traceable design specs.

What Changed — Evidence-Isolated Design Analysis with MCP

Most screenshot-to-code workflows dump multiple references into one prompt and hope the model synthesizes something coherent. The result? A spec that borrows navigation from site A, colors from site B, and a component from site C — with zero attribution.

Secret MCP (v0.6.0) enforces a stricter invariant: one reference, one sampling/createMessage request, one DESIGN_INDEX document. It's a local, open-source MCP server that searches GDWEB for design references, prepares visual evidence per work, and analyzes each independently.

What It Means For You — Traceability as an Operational Invariant

The core pattern is deceptively simple. For each reference r_i, the server builds evidence E_i (image tiles, crop geometry, color measurements, metadata) and sends it with includeContext: none. The model never sees another reference in the same request.

q_i = sampling/createMessage(C, E_i; includeContext = none)
D_i = G_theta(q_i)
References(q_i) = { r_i }

This isn't just about prompt hygiene. It means every design decision in your output document can be traced back to a specific source. When a client asks "why this color?", you point to the exact reference, tile, and coordinate.

Preparing Evidence: Tiling Long Screenshots

Full-page captures can be 7,000+ pixels tall. Sending them as one base64 blob wastes tokens and loses detail. Secret MCP:

  • Resizes desktop evidence to max 1,200px width
  • Splits long pages into overlapping 1,600px vertical tiles
  • Keeps mobile evidence separate
  • Records source-space coordinates for every tile via x_source = (cropLeft + x_tile) / scaleX
  • Measures 8 representative colors per tile in HEX, RGB, HSL

Results from a 3-reference test run: 12 evidence images totaling 816.9 KB, 96 color measurements, and 3 documents at ~9,000 tokens each. All 19 required headings present.

The 19-Section Output Contract

Every DESIGN_INDEX file covers: reconstruction goals, evidence coordinates, site map, navigation, per-page geometry, component abstraction, design tokens, typography, responsive behavior, accessibility, data states, frontend architecture, implementation tasks, acceptance criteria, and uncertainties.

Crucially, claims are labeled OBSERVED, MEASURED, INFERRED, or UNKNOWN. This prevents the classic failure where a model invents DOM structure from a static screenshot.

Try It Now — Running Secret MCP

Requires Node.js 20.19+:

The fixed request contract shown in the Secret MCP viewer

npx -y secret-design-mcp

MCP client config:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "secret-design": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "secret-design-mcp"]
    }
  }
}

Apply the pattern to your own workflows: even without installing Secret MCP, you can replicate its core discipline. When doing multi-reference design analysis in Claude Code, don't paste three screenshots into one prompt. Instead:

  1. Create a design-refs/ directory with one subfolder per reference
  2. Tile long screenshots into 1,600px slices with ImageMagick
  3. Send one request per reference with a fixed 19-section contract
  4. Save each output as a separate markdown file
  5. Label every claim with its certainty level

Honest Limits

The current evaluation is small: 2 smoke-test references and 3 preserved runs. There's no control group, human rating, or confidence intervals. A 19/19 heading score measures structural completeness, not design quality. The AEROFLOW case study (Korean Air reference → new Godot aviation site) proves the pipeline works end-to-end but isn't a controlled fidelity study.

Secret MCP target architecture

Still, the pattern is sound. If you've ever struggled to answer "which reference did that come from?", evidence isolation is the fix.


Source: dev.to

[Updated 23 Aug via medium_claude]

A separate security analysis of MCP tool calls reveals a related attack class: compromised upstreams can inject forged receipt fields at nested depths in JSON-RPC responses, surviving top-level sanitization. The fix: recursively strip all _ccs* keys at any depth, then JCS-canonicalize (RFC 8785), SHA-256 hash, and Ed25519 sign — in that order. The authors packaged this as npx ccs-lint, a 7.5KB zero-dependency CLI that detects nested field injection and missing 22-field receipts. This complements Secret MCP's evidence isolation by hardening the verification layer itself. [per Medium]

Sources cited in this article

  1. Medium
Source: gentic.news · · author= · citation.json

AI-assisted reporting. Generated by gentic.news from 1 verified source, fact-checked against the Living Graph of 4,300+ entities. Edited by Ala SMITH.

Following this story?

Get a weekly digest with AI predictions, trends, and analysis — free.

AI Analysis

**What should Claude Code users do differently?** Stop mixing references. The next time you ask Claude Code to analyze multiple design screenshots, split the work into separate requests. Use `includeContext: none` semantics by keeping each prompt self-contained — don't reference other files in the same message. This costs more requests but saves debugging time when specs conflict. **Adopt the labeling discipline.** Before you generate any design spec, add a requirement: every major claim must be prefixed with `OBSERVED`, `MEASURED`, `INFERRED`, or `UNKNOWN`. This forces Claude Code to distinguish what it actually sees in the image from what it's guessing. You'll catch hallucinated components before they reach your implementation tasks. **Tile your screenshots.** If you're sending full-page captures to Claude Code, you're wasting context and losing detail. Pre-process with a script that resizes to 1,200px width and slices into 1,600px vertical tiles with overlap. Include tile coordinates in the prompt so Claude can reference exact positions. This is the single biggest token-efficiency win in the article.
Compare side-by-side
Secret MCP vs GDWEB

Mentioned in this article

Enjoyed this article?
Share:

AI Toolslive

Five one-click lenses on this article. Cached for 24h.

Pick a tool above to generate an instant lens on this article.

Related Articles

From the lab

The framework underneath this story

Every article on this site sits on top of one engine and one framework — both built by the lab.

More in Open Source

View all