Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
android-build-agent

android-build-agent

by Tommyface
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

android_list_profiles

Lists registered Android projects with their repositories, SDK versions, and toolchain readiness so you can verify build setup before running Gradle builds.

Instructions

列出已登记的 Android 项目（profile）、对应仓库、SDK 版本与工具链是否就绪。

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": "android_list_profiles"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does valuable work by naming the returned facets (repository, SDK version, toolchain readiness), effectively signaling that this is a non-mutating inventory read and what each entry contains. It stops short of disclosing ordering, whether results are cached, or whether toolchain readiness is computed live.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the verb and resource and then enumerates the returned fields without filler. Nothing is redundant or misplaced.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple zero-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields an agent would need to decide its next step (e.g., whether to run android_install_toolchain). Missing only a note on result shape/ordering, which is minor at this complexity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter meaning to convey; the baseline of 4 applies. The description does not waste space restating arguments, and correctly frames the operation as unfiltered listing.

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?

"列出已登记的 Android 项目（profile）" gives a specific verb (列出) plus the resource (Android profiles), and adds the scope of what is returned: repositories, SDK version, toolchain readiness. This is clearly a read-only discovery tool, distinguishable in intent from android_build or android_install_toolchain, though no sibling is named explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The listing nature implies a discovery/before-you-build use case, but the description never states when to call this versus android_build or android_install_toolchain, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. Usage has to be inferred from the returned fields rather than read from the text.

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