Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AndroidBuildMCP

AndroidBuildMCP

by dev-jackson
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Doctor

doctor
Read-only

Diagnose Android development environment issues by checking SDK location, adb, emulator, avdmanager, Java, and connected devices. Run this first when another tool fails with a missing-binary error.

Instructions

Check the Android development environment: SDK location, adb, emulator, avdmanager, Java, and connected devices. Run this first if any other tool fails with a missing-binary error.

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": "doctor"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With readOnlyHint=true annotation, the safety profile is already known. The description adds context by enumerating the environment components being inspected, giving the agent a clear expectation of what the tool examines beyond just 'check'. No contradictory behavior is described.

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 two concise sentences. The first sentence front-loads the verb and resource list, and the second provides a critical usage tip. Every word earns its place; no redundancy.

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?

For a simple no-parameter diagnostic tool, the description fully covers what it checks and when to invoke it. No output schema exists, but the description doesn't need to explain return values since the purpose is clear and the tool is self-contained.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool has zero parameters (schema coverage 100% and property count 0), so per the rubric the baseline is 4. The description appropriately stays silent on parameters since none exist.

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 checks the Android development environment, listing specific components (SDK location, adb, emulator, avdmanager, Java, connected devices). The verb 'Check' and resource list make the purpose unambiguous and distinguish it from sibling tools that perform build, test, or device interactions.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Run this first if any other tool fails with a missing-binary error.' This tells the agent the exact scenario for using the tool and establishes it as a diagnostic first step, effectively differentiating it from alternatives.

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