React Native Expo MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

generate_component_test

Generate comprehensive React Native component tests with support for unit, integration, e2e, accessibility, performance, and snapshot tests using Jest, Detox, or Maestro.

Instructions

Generate comprehensive React Native component tests following industry best practices

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "component_code": "<component_code>",
      "component_name": "<component_name>"
    },
    "name": "generate_component_test"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`component_code`	Yes	React Native component code to generate tests for
`component_name`	Yes	Name of the component
`test_type`	No	Type of tests to generate	comprehensive
`testing_framework`	No	Testing framework preference	jest
`include_accessibility`	No	Include accessibility tests
`include_performance`	No	Include performance tests
`include_snapshot`	No	Include snapshot tests

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.0.1May 29, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

No annotations provided, and the description is a single sentence. It does not disclose side effects (e.g., file creation, overwriting), authorization needs, or output behavior beyond generation.

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 sentence of 10 words, which is concise and front-loaded. However, it sacrifices informativeness for brevity.

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?

With 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should provide more context about output format, file generation, or usage scenarios. It fails to cover these aspects.

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 parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, resulting in a 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 the verb 'generate' and the resource 'React Native component tests', with a quality indicator 'following industry best practices'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'analyze_test_coverage' that analyze rather than generate.

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 vs alternatives (e.g., 'analyze_testing_strategy', 'analyze_component'). No prerequisites, exclusions, or context provided.

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