android-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

mobile_wait

Wait for a UI element to appear or disappear on Android, with timeout. Specify text, resource ID, class name, or content description.

Instructions

Wait for a UI element to appear or disappear on the screen, with timeout.

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": "mobile_wait"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`text`	No	Text to wait for
`serial`	No	ADB device serial (optional)
`timeout`	No	Max wait time in ms (default: 10000)
`className`	No	Class name to wait for
`disappear`	No	Wait for element to disappear instead of appear (default: false)
`description`	No	Content description to wait for
`resource_id`	No	Resource ID to wait for

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 7, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description should fully disclose behavior. It only mentions waiting with timeout but fails to explain what happens on timeout (e.g., error, return value) or how multiple parameters interact (e.g., logical AND/OR).

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 concise sentence that covers the core action. While efficient, it could be more structured with parameter usage hints, but not to the point of verbosity.

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

Completeness2/5

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

The tool has 7 parameters and no output schema. The description omits critical context like return behavior, timeout error handling, and parameter combinatory logic, making it incomplete for effective use.

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%, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema, providing baseline value.

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's purpose: wait for a UI element to appear or disappear with a timeout. It uses specific verbs and resources, and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools which are not wait-based.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like mobile_button or mobile_gesture. There is no mention of prerequisites, when-not-to-use, or recommended scenarios.

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