pebble-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

pebble_install

Install a Pebble app into the emulator, building the project or using a .pbw file. Resets the emulator for a clean launch, then starts the app.

Instructions

Install an app into the emulator, starting it if needed.

target is either a project directory (built first if needed) or a path to a prebuilt .pbw file; relative paths resolve against the workspace root. The emulator is killed and wiped first — the reliable-launch lesson — so expect a few seconds of startup. Requires the pebble CLI on PATH.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "target": "<target>"
    },
    "name": "pebble_install"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`target`	Yes
`platform`	No		emery

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It explicitly discloses destructive behavior ('emulator is killed and wiped first'), startup delay, and environmental prerequisite ('Requires the pebble CLI on PATH'). This is substantial disclosure.

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 four concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, then target semantics, side effects, and environment requirement. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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?

The description covers target types, destructive side effects, startup delay, and the CLI requirement. It omits the 'platform' parameter meaning, and since an output schema exists, return values are not required. Overall it is adequate for a tool with this complexity.

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?

The description thoroughly explains the 'target' parameter (project directory vs .pbw, relative path resolution). However, it does not mention the 'platform' parameter at all, leaving its default and meaning undocumented. Since schema description coverage is 0%, this is a partial gap in compensating for parameter semantics.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Install an app into the emulator, starting it if needed.' This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like emu_start (which just starts the emulator) and pebble_build (which builds without installing).

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?

It gives clear context: target can be a project directory or a .pbw file, relative paths resolve against workspace root. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use this tool, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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