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

ios-control-mcp

by als0m3
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

iphone_screenshot

Capture an iPhone screen on demand at native resolution, then downscale it to a maximum width for transport.

Instructions

Capture the iPhone screen and return the image. Taken on demand at the native resolution, then downscaled to max_width for transport.

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": "iphone_screenshot"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
max_widthNoOutput width in pixels (default 900).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
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. It does disclose capture timing (on-demand) and a processing step (native capture then downscale), but says nothing about whether a device must be connected, what happens with multiple devices (iphone_list_devices exists as a sibling), failure modes, or whether the returned image is inline data or a path.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the processing pipeline. No filler and every clause carries information.

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?

For a one-parameter tool this is nearly sufficient, but with no output schema and no annotations the description should say what the agent receives (inline image versus file reference) and any device-targeting behavior, given siblings like iphone_list_devices exist.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, and the description adds genuine meaning: it explains that capture is always at native resolution and max_width only controls the downscale applied for transport, which tells the agent the parameter affects output size rather than capture quality.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ("Capture the iPhone screen and return the image"), which is unambiguous and naturally distinct from the interaction siblings like iphone_tap or iphone_swipe. It does not explicitly name a sibling or contrast with one, so it falls short of the top score.

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?

"Taken on demand" implies the tool is invoked manually rather than streamed, but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over iphone_status, or on the common pattern of capturing after a tap/swipe to verify state. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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