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

ios-control-mcp

by als0m3
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

iphone_button

Press iPhone hardware buttons like home, lock, volume, mute, or Siri to control device functions programmatically.

Instructions

Press a hardware button: home, lock, volume-up, volume-down, mute or siri.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "iphone_button"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden, yet it discloses no behavioral consequences: lock likely sleeps/wakes the screen, mute may toggle state, home may background an app, and nothing is said about errors or required device state. For a state-changing device control this is a meaningful 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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the action first and the valid values after; nothing is wasted and it is easy to scan.

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?

The tool is simple (one required enum parameter, no output schema), and the description covers the action and its options adequately. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it leaves the agent without any statement of side effects or expected result.

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 does restate the valid button names, but those are already enumerated in the schema's enum, adding no new meaning such as whether 'mute' is a toggle or a one-way action, or how 'siri' behaves.

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?

Clear specific verb plus resource: 'Press a hardware button' with an enumerated set of physical buttons. This distinguishes it from siblings like iphone_tap and iphone_swipe, which act on the screen rather than hardware keys, though that contrast is implied rather than stated.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is for physical keys (home/lock/volume/mute/siri) versus screen gestures, but the description never says when to choose this over iphone_tap or iphone_status, nor any preconditions such as device connection.

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