Skip to main content
Glama
appium

MCP Appium

Official
by appium
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

select_device

Identify and pick a local iOS or Android device for Appium testing, auto-selecting when only one is available and prompting user choice for multiple.

Instructions

Discover/select a LOCAL device. Ask for platform if unknown; one device is auto-selected. For multiple devices, ask the user to choose, then pass deviceUdid. Next: prepare_ios_simulator for iOS simulators, then appium_session_management action=create. Skip for REMOTE servers: pass device capabilities (appium:deviceName/appium:udid) and the user-provided remoteServerUrl to session creation.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
platformYesPlatform chosen by the user.
deviceUdidNoUser-selected UDID. Omit to discover devices.
iosDeviceTypeNoRequired for ios: simulator or real device.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.95.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / deviceUdid / description
      Previous value: -"The UDID of the device selected by the user. If not provided, this tool will list available devices for the user to choose from."New value: +"User-selected UDID. Omit to discover devices."
    • changedInput schema / properties / iosDeviceType / description
      Previous value: -"For iOS only: Specify whether to use 'simulator' or 'real' device. REQUIRED when platform is 'ios'."New value: +"Required for ios: simulator or real device."
    • changedInput schema / properties / platform / description
      Previous value: -"The platform to list devices for (must match previously selected platform)"New value: +"Platform chosen by the user."
  2. First observedv1.92.11

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations provide little signal (both hints false), so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses interactive behavior: asking the user, auto-selecting one device, or requesting a choice among multiple. It also explains what to do in the remote case, giving the agent a clear behavioral contract, though it does not address no-device or failure scenarios.

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?

The description is compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, then proceeds through decision branches and exceptions. It uses semicolons and colons to pack workflow into three sentences with minimal waste. A bulleted structure might improve scannability, but every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given the simple parameter surface and lack of an output schema, the description covers purpose, decision rules, the remote exception, and next steps for iOS simulators. It is missing a real-iOS device route and any behavior for zero devices found, but the overall flow is clear enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly in common cases.

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 100%, and each parameter already has a meaningful description. The tool description adds only slight reinforcement, such as 'ask the user to choose, then pass deviceUdid,' which is already implied by the schema. There is no substantial semantic value beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Discover/select a LOCAL device.' It clearly delineates local versus remote use, which distinguishes it from sibling Appium session/device tools. The phrase 'Skip for REMOTE servers' further separates this tool's scope from session-creation tools.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives explicit decision guidance: ask for platform if unknown, auto-select when one device, ask the user when multiple, and skip for remote servers by passing capabilities to session creation. However, it only names prepare_ios_simulator for iOS simulators and omits the real-iOS preparation path, leaving a sibling-adjacent gap.

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