Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Android Studio MCP

Android Studio MCP

by crimSun-dev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

List Gradle tasks

gradle_tasks
Read-only

Lists Gradle tasks for an Android project or specific module to help you discover and run available build commands.

Instructions

List the Gradle tasks available in the project (or one module).

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": "gradle_tasks"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
allNo
moduleNoModule path such as :app
projectDirNoAndroid project root. Defaults to ANDROID_PROJECT_DIR or the server's cwd.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds almost nothing beyond that. It doesn't say whether the listing is fast/cached, whether it depends on a Gradle sync state, or what the output looks like (no output schema exists).

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?

A single short sentence with no filler, front-loaded with the verb and resource. It is efficient, bordering on under-specified rather than bloated.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a tool with an undocumented 'all' flag, no output schema, and no stated prerequisite (e.g., that a project dir must exist or Gradle must be syncable), the one-sentence description leaves the agent guessing about output shape and the meaning of the boolean option.

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 coverage is 67%: module and projectDir are documented in the schema, but the 'all' boolean has no description anywhere. The description mentions module scope only obliquely and never explains that setting 'all' includes tasks from all subprojects, leaving a meaningful option ambiguous.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the Gradle tasks') and notes the project-or-module scope. It is distinguishable from siblings like gradle_run or build by the verb 'list', though it never names those alternatives explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to call this versus gradle_run, build, or project_info, and no hint that listing is typically a precursor to running a task. The parenthetical '(or one module)' implies a scenario but doesn't state when or why to choose it.

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