Skip to main content
Glama
mobile-next

Mobile Next MCP Server

Official
by mobile-next
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Press Button

mobile_press_button

Press a specified button (e.g., BACK, HOME, volume, DPAD) on a selected mobile device to simulate user input.

Instructions

Press a button on device

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
buttonYesThe button to press. Supported buttons: BACK (android only), HOME, VOLUME_UP, VOLUME_DOWN, ENTER, DPAD_CENTER (android tv only), DPAD_UP (android tv only), DPAD_DOWN (android tv only), DPAD_LEFT (android tv only), DPAD_RIGHT (android tv only)
deviceYesThe device identifier to use. Use mobile_list_available_devices to find which devices are available to you.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.0.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / device
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The device identifier to use. Use mobile_list_available_devices to find which devices are available to you.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "button"
-]New value: +[
+  "device",
+  "button"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond what the annotations already state: readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. It does not mention platform restrictions, possible side effects of pressing device buttons, or that the action is a one-way command; there is no contradiction, but no extra disclosure either.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The sentence is short and front-loaded, but it does not earn its place because it merely restates the title with a generic 'on device.' It is under-specified rather than usefully concise.

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?

Although the schema fully documents the two parameters, the description is not complete enough for tool selection among many interaction siblings, and there is no mention of return behavior or platform/device suitability. For a state-changing action with no output schema, the agent is left to infer consequences.

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%, and the button parameter already documents the supported button names and platform caveats. The description adds no new parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a verb ('press') and a resource ('button on device'), so it is not completely tautological, but it is vague: it does not say this is for hardware/navigation buttons rather than screen taps, and it adds little beyond the tool title. It also does not distinguish itself from siblings like mobile_click_on_screen_at_coordinates or mobile_type_keys.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool instead of screen-interaction siblings, nor when it would not be appropriate (e.g., pressing a visible UI element vs a hardware button). The device parameter points to mobile_list_available_devices, but that addresses device selection, not tool selection.

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