Android Studio MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Read Android Lint results

lint_results

Read-only

Parses Android Lint XML reports and filters issues by severity to help identify warnings and errors after running lintDebug or lint.

Instructions

Parse the Android Lint XML report (run gradle_run with lintDebug or lint first).

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": "lint_results"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`module`	No
`projectDir`	No	Android project root. Defaults to ANDROID_PROJECT_DIR or the server's cwd.
`minSeverity`	No		Warning

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 26, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes this is a safe read. The description adds the useful prerequisite that a lint report must exist first, but it doesn't say what happens if no report is found, whether it re-parses stale output, or how results are shaped.

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 that conveys the action and the prerequisite with no filler. Every clause earns its place.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations beyond readOnlyHint, the description should describe what is returned (parsed issues, severities, counts) and clarify module/minSeverity behavior. None of that is present, leaving meaningful gaps for a 3-parameter tool.

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 only 33% — projectDir is documented inline while module and minSeverity are not. The description adds nothing about what module selects or how minSeverity filters findings (default Warning), so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap; the enum values help but the filtering semantics remain unexplained.

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 (parse) and resource (Android Lint XML report), which distinguishes it from generic siblings like test_results or build. It is clear about what artifact it operates on, though it doesn't name a sibling it contrasts with.

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?

Explicitly gives the precondition: run gradle_run with lintDebug or lint first, which tells the agent when this tool is applicable. It doesn't discuss alternatives (e.g., ide_problems) or what to do if the report is absent, so it falls short of a full when/when-not treatment.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.