Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
frida-ios-mcp

frida-ios-mcp

by YPYT1
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript

screen_shot

Capture a pixel screenshot from an iOS device using lockdown ScreenshotService. Use when texts are sparse or visual layout is unclear, returning image and metadata.

Instructions

Pixel screenshot via lockdown ScreenshotService (pymobiledevice3) — NOT Accessibility, not Frida UI dump. Use when texts are sparse / visual layout unclear. Still prefer screen_snapshot for tap refs. Needs FRIDA_MCP_PYTHON + pymobiledevice3 (+ optional Pillow for JPEG). Returns image + meta.

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": "screen_shot"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
udidNo
qualityNoJPEG quality 1-95 when Pillow available, default 70

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries burden. It mentions dependencies (pymobiledevice3, optional Pillow) and return type (image+meta), but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only or has side effects. Acceptable for a screenshot tool but could be more detailed.

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?

Concise single paragraph of ~40 words. Every sentence adds value: purpose, usage guidance, alternative, requirements, return type. No fluff, front-loaded with key information.

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?

Completes most needs: explains purpose, usage, dependencies, and return. Lacks detail on meta return and udid parameter, but overall sufficient for a simple tool with 2 parameters.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 50% (only quality has description). The tool description adds no additional meaning to parameters; udid is unexplained and quality lacks context beyond schema. Does not compensate for missing schema descriptions.

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 it is a pixel screenshot via lockdown ScreenshotService, distinguishing itself from Accessibility and Frida UI dump. It also mentions preferring screen_snapshot for tap refs, differentiating from sibling tools.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly states when to use (texts sparse/visual layout unclear) and when not to (prefer screen_snapshot for tap refs), providing clear context and an alternative tool.

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