Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
adb-mcp

adb-mcp

by FlashZ
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

start_service

Start an Android service by specifying its component (pkg/.Service) through ADB, enabling device-side background tasks to run.

Instructions

Start a service by component 'pkg/.Service' (am startservice).

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": "<component>"
    },
    "name": "start_service"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
serialNo
componentYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It reveals the underlying mechanism (`am startservice`) but says nothing about permissions required, side effects, whether the service persists, or failure modes for a mutation-style operation.

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?

A single tight sentence that front-loads the action and includes the parameter format. No wasted words, though it is minimal rather than rich.

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

Completeness3/5

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

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, and the required parameter format is covered. However, with no annotations and no usage context for a 2-param device-control tool, the definition is only adequate.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It usefully clarifies the required 'component' parameter's format ('pkg/.Service'), but the optional 'serial' parameter is left entirely undocumented in both schema and description.

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 states a specific verb+resource ('Start a service') and specifies the component format 'pkg/.Service' with the underlying command `am startservice`. This distinguishes it from launch_activity and launch_package by resource type, though it does not name the siblings explicitly.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use start_service versus the many related siblings (launch_activity, launch_package, send_broadcast). No prerequisites, no exclusions, no selection criteria are provided.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools