Mobile Automator MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

List Flows

list_flows

Read-onlyIdempotent

Discover and list Maestro mobile test flows from a directory, including descriptions and tags from an optional manifest file.

Instructions

Discover named Maestro flows in a flows directory (default: ./flows). Each flow is a .yaml file; an optional _manifest.json adds descriptions, tags, and parameter specs. Use start_flow to execute one by name.

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": "list_flows"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`flowsDir`	No	Directory containing flow .yaml files (default: ./flows relative to the MCP server's working directory). Optional _manifest.json in this directory adds descriptions, tags, and param specs.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`flows`	Yes	Discovered flows, sorted by name
`total`	Yes	Number of flows returned
`flowsDir`	Yes	Absolute path to the directory that was scanned

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jun 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description adds value by explaining the file structure (.yaml files and optional manifest.json). No contradictions, and it provides additional context beyond annotations.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the purpose and directory, the second gives a pointer to the sibling tool. Very concise and well-structured.

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 tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is complete. It explains the file types and optional manifest, covering all necessary context without needing to describe return values.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra meaning by mentioning the optional _manifest.json and default path, enhancing understanding beyond the schema description.

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 it discovers named Maestro flows in a flows directory, using the verb 'discover' and specifying the resource (flows). It distinguishes from the sibling start_flow by noting to use that tool for execution.

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?

The description explicitly mentions using start_flow to execute flows by name, providing a clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide other alternatives.

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