spec: Dynamic View Content via embedded resources - #699
Conversation
Adds standardized support for typed dynamic content payloads (e.g. A2UI, application/a2ui+json) returned from tool calls as marked embedded resources, delivered by the host to the tool's predeclared renderer View: - contentMimeTypes renderer declaration on UIResourceMeta - _meta.ui.content marker (McpUiContentBlockMeta) on embedded resource content blocks in tool results - Normative host forwarding rules over ui/notifications/tool-result and proxied tools/call responses; payloads excluded from model context - contentMimeTypes extension setting for capability negotiation, with a native-rendering path via the top-level mimeTypes array - Rationale (decision #7), security mitigation (#6), and reservations Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@modelcontextprotocol/ext-apps
@modelcontextprotocol/server-basic-preact
@modelcontextprotocol/server-basic-react
@modelcontextprotocol/server-basic-solid
@modelcontextprotocol/server-basic-svelte
@modelcontextprotocol/server-basic-vanillajs
@modelcontextprotocol/server-basic-vue
@modelcontextprotocol/server-budget-allocator
@modelcontextprotocol/server-cohort-heatmap
@modelcontextprotocol/server-customer-segmentation
@modelcontextprotocol/server-debug
@modelcontextprotocol/server-lazy-auth
@modelcontextprotocol/server-map
@modelcontextprotocol/server-pdf
@modelcontextprotocol/server-scenario-modeler
@modelcontextprotocol/server-shadertoy
@modelcontextprotocol/server-sheet-music
@modelcontextprotocol/server-system-monitor
@modelcontextprotocol/server-threejs
@modelcontextprotocol/server-transcript
@modelcontextprotocol/server-video-resource
@modelcontextprotocol/server-wiki-explorer
commit: |
domfarolino
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think much of this makes sense, however I'm not totally convinced that we want to let MCP App authors bring their own renderer / bundle it statically anywhere. The appeal for declarative UI frameworks like A2UI is that we separate rendering from declarative UI:
- The untrusted actor brings the declarative UI
- The trusted actor brings the renderer, so it's in control of how declarative UI bytes are parsed and made sense of. The trusted actor controls all of the script on the page, all of the event handling,
fetch()ing, etc.
So at least for Gemini, I don't think there's a strong use case for letting authors ship their own renderer—it kind of defeats the gains of using A2UI.
I'm wondering if we could support a version of "dynamic views via embedded resources" where the agent host declares what renderers they support, and the app always sends down compatible bytes for that renderer, and the author doesn't have to be concerned about renderers at all.
Then for hosts that don't support the declarative view path, and therefore don't have the concern of "separating trusted rendering from untrusted declarative UI schemas", the author just does the normal thing of pre-registering static resources, which are just thin wrappers over their renderers. And as long as the host approves the renderers, nothing else has to change from the author's side.
Basically I'm just trying to find a path for hosts that want to enforce declarative UI for security reasons (to separate rendering/DOM building, from declarative UI structure) to be able to get the security wins of enforcing that their own renderer is used. Is that in scope?
|
|
||
| #### 4. Dynamic View Content (via embedded resources) | ||
|
|
||
| Some UI systems are generative in nature: the server produces a declarative, typed UI description at tool-call time (a document, not code), and a generic predeclared View renders it. [A2UI](https://a2ui.org) (`application/a2ui+json`) is the primary example. `structuredContent` is a poor fit for these payloads: it is untyped (no MIME type), single-valued, bound to the tool's `outputSchema`, and offers no interoperability path for non-MCP-Apps hosts that natively render the payload format. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is "document" the right word here? It definitely describes JSON (since "JSON documents"), but how about:
Some UI systems are generative in nature: the server produces a declarative, typed UI description at tool-call time (a UI schema, not executable code),
Thoughts?
|
|
||
| #### 4. Dynamic View Content (via embedded resources) | ||
|
|
||
| Some UI systems are generative in nature: the server produces a declarative, typed UI description at tool-call time (a document, not code), and a generic predeclared View renders it. [A2UI](https://a2ui.org) (`application/a2ui+json`) is the primary example. `structuredContent` is a poor fit for these payloads: it is untyped (no MIME type), single-valued, bound to the tool's `outputSchema`, and offers no interoperability path for non-MCP-Apps hosts that natively render the payload format. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
and offers no interoperability path for non-MCP-Apps hosts that natively render the payload format.
I'm not sure I follow this part. I agree with the other limitations of structuredContent, but what is the interop downside?
| * @example | ||
| * ["application/a2ui+json"] | ||
| */ | ||
| contentMimeTypes?: string[], |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is interesting. As far as I can tell, this lets a single resource (likely a static renderer) handle multiple EmbeddedResource types in a single tool call result, right? So I think it unlocks things like:
- A
ui://chart-viewerstatic resources is packaged with two static renderers: A2UI renderer, and a Geo JSON renderer, for example. The resource declares support for both A2UI and geo JSON mime types here. - The iframe loads, and when the tool call response comes in, it has two EmbeddedResources:
- One containing a bunch of A2UI bytes
- A second containing a bunch of geo JSON bytes
- Each embedded resource result gets injected into the iframe
- The iframe has some orchestration code that knows how to handle:
- Embedded resource A2UI bytes ➡️ pass it to the A2UI renderer
- Embedded resource Geo JSON bytes ➡️ pass it to the geo JSON renderer
Do I have this right? Are there known use cases where a single view wants to mix types like this? If it's not common / nobody will use it, I'm wondering if we should just make this a single string for now, but I guess that makes forward compat hard if the use case ever arises...
| * `_meta.ui.resourceUri`. Explicit targeting supports future | ||
| * multi-view tool results. | ||
| */ | ||
| rendererUri?: string; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The need for this escapes me. At first, I thought it's giving tool authors the chance to return an embedded resource whose bytes don't match any mime type declared in the resource's UIResourceMeta#contentMimeTypes... thus letting an iframe fetch a supporting renderer to make use of otherwise-foreign declarative UI bytes in a tool call result. But I guess it doesn't allow an embedded resource's mimeType drift out of sync from the view's contentMimeTypes—we still impose the subset requirement between the two.
Rather, it just lets an individual embedded resource elect to not be rendered inside of a pre-existing resource, but rather spin up a new view altogether? Is that it? Is this necessary now, or can it be added when a use case really depends on it?
Note
Spec-only PR. The SDK implementation (types, helpers, worked example) is stacked on top as a separate draft PR (#700) so spec discussion isn't entangled with code review.
Motivation
See issue #169 .
A growing class of UI systems is generative: the server produces a declarative, typed UI description at tool-call time - a document, not code - and a generic runtime renders it. A2UI (
application/a2ui+json) is the primary example, and there is active discussion about whether A2UI support should live inside the MCP Apps extension rather than as a parallel mechanism.MCP Apps today has no good channel for these payloads:
structuredContentis untyped (no MIME type), single-valued, bound to the tool'soutputSchema, and invisible to hosts that render the payload format natively.uri, amimeType, andtext/blobcontent - but there is no standardized contract for how MCP Apps hosts treat them: hosts today may strip them fromui/notifications/tool-resultor inject large presentation payloads into model context, and servers can't detect either.This PR adds that contract to
specification/draft/apps.mdx: Dynamic View Content - typed payloads returned from tool calls as marked embedded resources, forwarded by the host to the tool's predeclared renderer view.The proposal
Zero new messages. Delivery rides entirely on the existing
ui/notifications/tool-resultnotification and proxiedtools/callresponses. The proposal reduces to four primitives:contentMimeTypes?: string[]onUIResourceMeta: the view declares which payload MIME types it renders. Participates in the existing list-vs-read metadata precedence rules._meta.ui.content(McpUiContentBlockMeta, with an optionalrendererUrifor future multi-view results) on embedded resource content blocks inCallToolResult.content.tool-resultnotifications and in proxiedtools/callresponses); SHOULD NOT be added to model context; MAY be type-filtered against the renderer's declaredcontentMimeTypesand size-limited.contentMimeTypesextension setting; hosts MAY advertise["*"]to forward any declared payload type opaquely (hosts never interpret payloads, only route them into the sandboxed view). Servers check it and degrade to text-only/structuredContentvariants when absent.sequenceDiagram autonumber actor User participant View as Renderer View (ui:// resource) participant Host as Host (AppBridge) participant Server as MCP Server Note over Host,Server: initialize - extensions["io.modelcontextprotocol/ui"]:<br/>{ mimeTypes: ["text/html#59;profile=mcp-app"], contentMimeTypes: ["application/a2ui+json"] } Host->>Server: resources/read ui://server/renderer Server-->>Host: HTML renderer, _meta.ui.contentMimeTypes: ["application/a2ui+json"] Note over Host: Renderer is predeclared, prefetchable,<br/>reviewable - unchanged from SEP-1865 Host->>Server: tools/call search-flights (agent-initiated) Server-->>Host: CallToolResult: text fallback +<br/>embedded resource (application/a2ui+json, _meta.ui.content) Host->>View: ui/notifications/tool-result - marked blocks forwarded unmodified Note over Host: Marked payloads are NOT added to model context View->>View: extract marked payloads, render surface User->>View: clicks a button in the rendered surface View->>Host: tools/call select-flight (visibility: ["app"]) Host->>Server: proxied tools/call Server-->>Host: new marked payload (incremental update) Host-->>View: tools/call response - marked blocks forwarded unmodified View->>View: apply update (interactive loop)Relationship to SEP-1865's rejection of embedded resources
This deliberately does not revisit design decision #1 (Predeclared Resources vs. Inline Embedding): the renderer remains a predeclared, prefetchable, reviewable
ui://resource. Embedded resources here carry only data payloads consumed by that renderer - the same template/data split the spec already establishes withstructuredContent, extended to typed, multi-valued, self-describing documents.One server response, three host classes
The interop payoff of using core-MCP embedded resources (rather than an Apps-private channel) is that a server can serve a single tool response to every kind of host:
mimeTypes: ["text/html;profile=mcp-app"],contentMimeTypes: ["application/a2ui+json"]ui://renderer, forwards payloads to itmimeTypes: [..., "application/a2ui+json"]contentfallbackThis directly addresses the "A2UI-over-MCP vs. A2UI-over-MCP-Apps" question: both are the same server response - the difference is only which capability the host advertises. A2UI-specific conventions (payload semantics,
userAction/ tool-call mapping) can layer on top of this generic mechanism as SDK/renderer guidance rather than spec text.Design decisions (rejected alternatives in the Rationale section)
_meta.ui.contentmarker rather than MIME inference: servers legitimately return embedded resources for other purposes (files, records for the user); the marker makes routing intent unambiguous, and itsrendererUrislot supports future multi-view tool results (already listed under SEP-1865's future considerations).contentMimeTypesdeclared on the resource, not the tool: the renderer owns the parsing contract, multiple tools share it, and the declaration is reviewable at connection time alongside CSP.McpUiToolMetastays untouched.ui/notifications/contentmessage: it would duplicate delivery semantics, complicate ordering relative totool-result, and grow host surface area for no expressive gain. Server-push content injection outside tool calls can be added later without conflicting with this design.resources/read, andui://remains reserved for renderable UI resources.Security
Payloads are data, not code: they are interpreted by a renderer that is itself sandboxed, CSP-constrained, and reviewable under the existing model. The new Security section adds: renderers MUST treat payloads as untrusted input (no
eval/innerHTMLof payload-derived strings); payload-referenced origins remain subject to the renderer's declared CSP; payloads flow through auditable JSON-RPC with declared MIME types (hosts may log, size-limit, type-filter); and marked payloads are excluded from model context by default - strictly safer than today's ambiguity around embedded resources in results.Backward compatibility
Fully additive. Hosts that don't advertise
contentMimeTypesbehave exactly as today; servers detect this and degrade. No existing messages, tools, or resources change. New reservations: the_meta.ui.contentkey on tool result content blocks, and thecontentMimeTypesfield inUIResourceMetaand in the extension settings.Changes
One file:
specification/draft/apps.mdx-UIResourceMeta.contentMimeTypes+ mirror in theresources/readresponse shape + the Metadata Location field listui/notifications/tool-resultcontentMimeTypesextension setting under Capability Negotiation_meta.ui.content,contentMimeTypes🤖 Generated with Claude Code