matchcn
A semantic index across shadcn-format component registries: find a
component by what it does, rather than what it is called.
Homepage: matchcn.dev
matchcn is an independent, unofficial project. It is not affiliated with,
endorsed by, or a partner of shadcn, any of the registries it indexes, or
classifier.dev/TypeSafe.
What it is
Hundreds of registries now publish components in the shadcn
registry.json format, and npx shadcn add can install from any of
them. No developer or coding agent can hold that many registries in
context, and existing directory tools only search component names, which
does not help when you know what you need but not what any given
registry decided to call it. matchcn tags every component across a fixed
set of properties (category, motion, visual density, interaction model,
and two others) using classifier.dev, then
matches a plain-language brief against those tags with deterministic
code, so the same brief always ranks the same way.
Status: early, read this before using it
This is a 2-3 day MVP covering 11 of the 372+ registries shadcn's own
public list currently has. It is not a comprehensive index. Specific,
known weak points, in order of how much they matter:
- Some registries are partly or fully excluded for paywalled
components, found by a real per-item availability check (does
npx shadcn add actually work unauthenticated, not just what the
index claims): aceternity (163 of 281 tagged components, 163 of 170
registry:block page-templates, 95.9% of that type) and
shadcn-dashboard (165 of 508) had the gated share filtered out before
shipping; the full tagged sets remain preserved, not lost
(docs/DECISIONS.md #12). shadcnblocks was tagged
(4,171 components) but is held back entirely: its own filter check got
contaminated by the vendor's rate limiter
(docs/ROADMAP.md), so it ships once a clean check
runs rather than on bad data. cult-ui.com isn't indexed at all: its
registry sits behind a bot challenge
(docs/DECISIONS.md #6).
- Tag confidence varies by registry and dimension, and the matcher
already accounts for it.
visual_density is the weakest dimension
overall (36% of pilot answers under 0.6,
docs/PILOT_REPORT.md). Catalog-wide, 24.4% of
choice-dimension answers scored under 0.6 as of the 1,783-component
measurement, not yet recomputed for the current 3,717-component
catalog (a 20-item pre-tagging sample for cnippet/uiable scored 35%
under 0.6, higher than that baseline). assistant-ui is the lowest-
confidence registry measured (37.0% under 0.6), likely because its
agent/chat UI content sits furthest from the schema's original
motion/marketing anchors. A confidence-weighted matcher discounts all
of this automatically, so a weak tag pulls its own weight down instead
of producing a wrong confident answer, but a brief leaning heavily on
these registries or on visual density is the one most likely to get a
shortlist or no-match instead of a clean pick.
- Non-English briefs are known to be weaker, confirmed on 3 Polish
test briefs, not fixed. A Polish pricing brief and its English
equivalent were compared directly: English found a real, well-tagged
pricing component at 0.98 confidence, Polish returned no match at all.
A zero-cost fix was tried and tested properly on 3 Polish briefs: it
did not help, made one brief measurably worse, and left one unchanged,
so it was reverted for no measured benefit. Non-English input should
not be assumed to work. Details:
docs/DECISIONS.md #17.
None of these cause a wrong forced answer: when confidence is genuinely
low, pick_component returns a shortlist or an explicit no-match, never
a single silent guess. That is the actual point of the tagging and
ranking design, not a disclaimer bolted on afterward. See
docs/DEMO_REPORT.md for real examples of all
three outcomes, including two briefs designed to fail.
Install
npx matchcn
MCP setup
Add to your MCP client's config (for example Claude Desktop's
claude_desktop_config.json, or Claude Code's .mcp.json):
{
"mcpServers": {
"matchcn": {
"command": "npx",
"args": ["-y", "matchcn"]
}
}
}
This exposes one tool, pick_component(brief, registry?, maxResults?).
Worked example
$ pnpm demo
Brief: a dense bento grid for a landing page. This is real output from a
real run. classifier.dev does not guarantee identical answers across
calls, so the exact confidence number will vary between runs (0.79 to
0.98 observed across repeated runs during development); the outcome, the
chosen component, and the install command have been stable across every
run tried.
BRIEF: a dense bento grid for a landing page
----------------------------------------------------------------------
OUTCOME: CONFIDENT
Selected "bento-grid" from magicui.
-> bento-grid (magicui) confidence 0.85
install: npx shadcn@latest add https://magicui.design/r/bento-grid.json
matched: category, motion, visual_density, interaction_model, needs_external_data, decorative_only
not matched: (none)
resolve used: true decisions spent: 7
Every response includes a per-dimension reason (which of the six tagged
dimensions matched the brief and which did not), never just a name. Full
JSON shape and more examples, including a shortlist and two deliberate
no-match cases: docs/DEMO_REPORT.md.
How it works
Five stages: Ingest, Tag, Match, Resolve, Surface. Tagging runs ahead of
time and is committed as reviewable JSON (data/tags/); matching at
query time is deterministic code, not a model call, so the same brief
always ranks the same way. Full architecture, every design decision and
its rejected alternatives, and the exact tagging criteria used:
- docs/WHY.md: the problem, who this is for, what it explicitly is not
- docs/ARCHITECTURE.md: the five stages and the data flow
- docs/DIMENSIONS.md: the tag schema, every dimension's exact criteria
- docs/DECISIONS.md: numbered decision records, alternatives rejected and why
- docs/ROADMAP.md: what is shipped, what is deferred, what is parked
- docs/PILOT_REPORT.md, docs/FULL_RUN_REPORT.md, docs/DEMO_REPORT.md: real numbers from real runs
- RECON.md, docs/FILTER_REPORT.md: what was fetched and what was filtered out, with evidence
Registries indexed, and attribution
matchcn stores only derived tags (category, motion, density, and so on)
and a link back to each registry's own install command. It never copies,
stores, or redistributes any registry's component source code. Every
component you install still comes directly from its own registry via
npx shadcn add <url>.
4,578 components total, drawn from the fourteen registries above (343 of
shadcn-dashboard's 508 tagged components ship, the other 165 filtered
out as paywalled; 119 of aceternity's 282 tagged components ship, the
other 163 filtered out as paywalled; shadcn-ui-blocks ships only its
vendor-curated free-only index, not its combined free+paid index, which
was separately evaluated and rejected at 82% paywalled; see the
limitations section above for all three). The first six are the
motion/marketing family from the original MVP; the rest are a
product-UI expansion (forms, tables, dashboards, data display) added
after per-registry filter verification, see
docs/REGISTRY_EXPANSION_STEP1_2.md.
Three other product-UI candidates (shadcn-ui-blocks, plate, react-aria)
were evaluated and excluded for specific, evidenced filter gaps;
shadcnblocks was tagged but is not currently shipped, both tracked
in docs/ROADMAP.md. cnippet and uiable were added in a
second product-UI expansion; two other candidates from that same recon,
shadcnuikit and shadcn-space, were evaluated and excluded after a real
per-item availability check found genuine paywalls on 40% and 33.3% of
a 30-item sample respectively. uiable's descriptions are largely
name-echo templates ("X component.") rather than hand-written text, a
known limitation for that registry, shipped as is rather than blocked
on. Tagging runs through classifier.dev, a
free, keyless classification endpoint backed
by TypeSafe's Jev decision model.
Development
pnpm install
pnpm ingest # fetch and normalize all registries
pnpm tag # tag all components via classifier.dev
pnpm demo # run 3 briefs end to end
pnpm test # determinism tests for the matcher
pnpm typecheck
License
MIT, see LICENSE.