Skip to main content
Glama
conorluddy

XC-MCP: XCode CLI wrapper

by conorluddy
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Clone Simulator

simctl-clone

Clone an iOS simulator with all settings, installed apps, and current state preserved, creating a new UDID for backups or test variants.

Instructions

simctl-clone

Clone iOS simulator devices with complete state preservation.

Overview

Creates an exact duplicate of an existing simulator including all settings, installed apps, and current state. The cloned simulator gets a new UDID but preserves all configuration. Useful for creating backups of configured simulators before experiments or maintaining multiple test variants.

Parameters

Required

  • deviceId (string): Source device UDID to clone (from simctl-list)

  • newName (string): Display name for the cloned simulator

Returns

Clone status with both source and new device information, including new UDID, success indicator, command output, and guidance for managing the cloned device.

Examples

Clone simulator for testing

await simctlCloneTool({
  deviceId: 'ABC-123-DEF',
  newName: 'TestDevice-Snapshot'
});

Create backup before experiments

await simctlCloneTool({
  deviceId: 'PRODUCTION-UDID',
  newName: 'Production Test Backup'
});

Related Tools

  • simctl-list: Find source device UDID to clone

  • simctl-boot: Boot cloned device after creation

  • simctl-delete: Remove cloned device when no longer needed

Notes

  • Cloned device includes all apps and data from source

  • New UDID is generated automatically

  • Cloning can take 1-2 minutes depending on data size

  • Source device name and configuration are preserved

  • Device can be in any state (booted, shutdown) during clone

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
newNameYes
deviceIdYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv4.1.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=false (not destructive) and readOnlyHint=false (mutates by creating a new simulator). The description adds useful context: cloning can take 1-2 minutes, creates a new UDID automatically, preserves all apps and data, and works in any device state. This goes beyond annotations by explaining the non-destructive nature (source is preserved) and performance characteristics.

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 well-structured with clear sections (Overview, Parameters, Returns, Examples, Related Tools, Notes). It is appropriately detailed for a complex tool, but slightly verbose with repetitive information (cloning preserves state mentioned multiple times). The purpose is front-loaded in the overview, and examples are concise.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (cloning a simulator involves preserving apps, data, and state), the description is complete: it covers what the tool does, parameters, return values (new UDID, status), examples, and performance expectations. The output is described sufficiently without an output schema, listing all key information an agent needs.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description dedicates a full section to parameters, clearly explaining deviceId as 'Source device UDID to clone (from simctl-list)' and newName as 'Display name for the cloned simulator'. It also provides practical examples showing how parameters are used in context, which the schema alone does not convey.

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 the tool clones iOS simulator devices with complete state preservation, distinguishes it from simctl-create (which creates a new empty simulator) by emphasizing exact duplication, and explains the result is a new UDID preserving all configuration. This sets it apart from siblings like simctl-erase or simctl-rename.

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 provides clear use cases such as 'backups of configured simulators before experiments' and 'maintaining multiple test variants', and lists related tools like simctl-list, simctl-boot, and simctl-delete with their purposes. However, it doesn't explicitly say when not to use this tool versus simctl-create or other alternatives, leaving some ambiguity.

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