Skip to main content
Glama

dhis2_android_setup_testing

Configure testing frameworks and generate test patterns for DHIS2 Android applications. Set up unit, integration, and UI tests with mock strategies for API responses and database operations.

Instructions

Configure testing framework and generate test patterns for DHIS2 Android app

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
testingFrameworksYesTesting frameworks to include
testTypesYesTypes of tests to generate
mockStrategiesNo
coverageNo

Implementation Reference

  • Main dispatcher handler for the 'dhis2_android_setup_testing' tool. Extracts arguments, calls the generator function, and returns formatted markdown response.
    case 'dhis2_android_setup_testing':
      const testingArgs = args as any;
      const testingConfig = generateAndroidTestingConfiguration(testingArgs);
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: 'text',
            text: testingConfig,
          },
        ],
      };
  • Core handler logic that generates the DHIS2 Android testing configuration markdown template based on provided arguments like testingFrameworks and testTypes.
    export function generateAndroidTestingConfiguration(args: any): string {
      return `# DHIS2 Android Testing Configuration
    
    Testing frameworks: ${args.testingFrameworks.join(', ')}
    Test types: ${args.testTypes.join(', ')}
    
    ## Implementation details for testing setup...
    `;
    }
    
    export function generateAndroidUIConfiguration(args: any): string {
  • Tool permission registration: requires 'canUseMobileFeatures' permission to access this development tool.
    ['dhis2_android_setup_testing', 'canUseMobileFeatures'],
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'configure' and 'generate', implying creation/modification, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as whether this tool overwrites existing files, requires specific permissions, has side effects on the project structure, or handles errors. For a setup tool with no annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core actions ('configure testing framework', 'generate test patterns') with no wasted words. It's appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (4 parameters, nested objects, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool outputs (e.g., generated files, configuration changes), behavioral constraints, or error handling. For a setup tool with significant parameters, more context is needed to guide 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 50%, with parameters like 'testingFrameworks' and 'testTypes' well-described in the schema, but 'mockStrategies' and 'coverage' having nested objects with partial descriptions. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, so it doesn't compensate for the coverage gap. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema provides some documentation.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose with specific verbs ('configure', 'generate') and resources ('testing framework', 'test patterns'), and identifies the target ('DHIS2 Android app'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'dhis2_generate_test_setup' by focusing on Android-specific testing, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other Android setup tools like 'dhis2_android_setup_authentication'.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., whether the project must be initialized), timing in development workflow, or comparisons to sibling tools like 'dhis2_generate_test_setup' or 'dhis2_android_init_project'. Usage is implied but not explicitly stated.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Dradebo/dhis2-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server