Skip to main content
Glama

flutter_build

Build Flutter applications for specific platforms like Android, iOS, web, or desktop. Compile projects with configurable modes and flavors to create deployable packages.

Instructions

Build Flutter app for specific target platform

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cwdYesWorking directory (Flutter project root)
targetYesBuild target platform
buildModeNoBuild mode
flavorNoBuild flavor

Implementation Reference

  • The async handler function that implements the core logic of the flutter_build tool: input validation, Flutter project validation, command construction (flutter build [target] [--mode] [--flavor]), execution with 30min timeout, error handling, and structured response.
    handler: async (args: any) => {
      const validation = FlutterBuildSchema.safeParse(args);
      if (!validation.success) {
        throw new Error(`Invalid request: ${validation.error.message}`);
      }
    
      const { cwd, target, buildMode = 'debug', flavor } = validation.data;
    
      // Validate that it's a Flutter project
      await validateFlutterProject(cwd);
    
      const flutter_args = ['build', target];
      
      if (buildMode !== 'debug') {
        flutter_args.push(`--${buildMode}`);
      }
      
      if (flavor) {
        flutter_args.push('--flavor', flavor);
      }
    
      const result = await processExecutor.execute('flutter', flutter_args, {
        cwd,
        timeout: 1800000, // 30 minutes timeout for builds
      });
    
      if (result.exitCode !== 0) {
        throw new Error(`Flutter build failed: ${result.stderr || result.stdout}`);
      }
    
      return {
        success: true,
        data: {
          target,
          buildMode,
          flavor,
          projectPath: cwd,
          output: result.stdout,
          duration: result.duration,
          exitCode: result.exitCode,
        },
      };
    }
  • Zod input validation schema for the flutter_build tool, defining parameters: cwd (required), target (enum of build targets), buildMode (debug|profile|release, default debug), flavor (optional). Used in handler for safeParse.
    const FlutterBuildSchema = z.object({
      cwd: z.string().min(1),
      target: z.enum(['apk', 'appbundle', 'ipa', 'ios', 'android', 'web', 'windows', 'macos', 'linux']),
      buildMode: z.enum(['debug', 'profile', 'release']).default('debug'),
      flavor: z.string().optional(),
    });
  • Registration of the flutter_build tool in the createFlutterTools Map, including name, description, JSON inputSchema (mirroring Zod schema), and reference to the handler function.
    tools.set('flutter_build', {
      name: 'flutter_build',
      description: 'Build Flutter app for specific target platform',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          cwd: { type: 'string', minLength: 1, description: 'Working directory (Flutter project root)' },
          target: { 
            type: 'string',
            enum: ['apk', 'appbundle', 'ipa', 'ios', 'android', 'web', 'windows', 'macos', 'linux'],
            description: 'Build target platform'
          },
          buildMode: {
            type: 'string',
            enum: ['debug', 'profile', 'release'],
            description: 'Build mode'
          },
          flavor: { type: 'string', description: 'Build flavor' }
        },
        required: ['cwd', 'target']
      },
      handler: async (args: any) => {
        const validation = FlutterBuildSchema.safeParse(args);
        if (!validation.success) {
          throw new Error(`Invalid request: ${validation.error.message}`);
        }
    
        const { cwd, target, buildMode = 'debug', flavor } = validation.data;
    
        // Validate that it's a Flutter project
        await validateFlutterProject(cwd);
    
        const flutter_args = ['build', target];
        
        if (buildMode !== 'debug') {
          flutter_args.push(`--${buildMode}`);
        }
        
        if (flavor) {
          flutter_args.push('--flavor', flavor);
        }
    
        const result = await processExecutor.execute('flutter', flutter_args, {
          cwd,
          timeout: 1800000, // 30 minutes timeout for builds
        });
    
        if (result.exitCode !== 0) {
          throw new Error(`Flutter build failed: ${result.stderr || result.stdout}`);
        }
    
        return {
          success: true,
          data: {
            target,
            buildMode,
            flavor,
            projectPath: cwd,
            output: result.stdout,
            duration: result.duration,
            exitCode: result.exitCode,
          },
        };
      }
    });
  • Shared helper function validateFlutterProject used by flutter_build (and other Flutter tools) to ensure the cwd is a valid Flutter project by checking for pubspec.yaml with flutter: section.
    const validateFlutterProject = async (cwd: string): Promise<void> => {
      const pubspecPath = path.join(cwd, 'pubspec.yaml');
      try {
        await fs.access(pubspecPath);
        const pubspecContent = await fs.readFile(pubspecPath, 'utf8');
        if (!pubspecContent.includes('flutter:')) {
          throw new Error(`Directory does not appear to be a Flutter project. No flutter section found in ${pubspecPath}`);
        }
      } catch {
        throw new Error(`pubspec.yaml not found. Flutter project must contain pubspec.yaml at: ${pubspecPath}`);
      }
    };
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Build' implies a potentially long-running, resource-intensive process that generates output files, but the description doesn't mention execution time, side effects (e.g., creating build artifacts), error handling, or output location. It lacks critical context for safe and effective use.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary words. Every word earns its place, making it easy to parse quickly. No structural issues or redundancy are present.

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?

Given the complexity of a build tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., success status, build artifacts, error messages), behavioral traits like timeouts or file system changes, or how it differs from siblings like flutter_release_build. This leaves significant gaps for agent understanding.

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%, with clear documentation for all parameters (cwd, target, buildMode, flavor). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying that 'target platform' relates to the 'target' parameter. Since the schema does the heavy lifting, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the verb ('Build') and resource ('Flutter app') with the specific scope 'for specific target platform'. It distinguishes from siblings like flutter_clean, flutter_run, and flutter_test by focusing on compilation rather than cleaning, execution, or testing. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from flutter_release_build, which appears to be a specialized sibling.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like flutter_release_build or flutter_run. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., Flutter project setup), exclusions, or contextual triggers. The agent must infer usage from the tool name and parameters alone.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/cristianoaredes/mcp-mobile-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server