Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Mobile Design MCP

Mobile Design MCP

by noxpublishing
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

get_flow

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read an ordered reference flow and its capture provenance to review mobile navigation and verify each screen capture's source.

Instructions

Read an ordered reference flow and its capture provenance.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "get_flow"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so safety behavior is covered. The description adds useful context that the flow is ordered and includes capture provenance, but it does not explain error behavior, permissions, or pagination.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It efficiently states the core operation and resource characteristics.

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?

For a one-parameter read tool with no output schema and rich annotations, the description is still too thin: it does not clarify the id parameter, what a "reference flow" is, or what the returned provenance includes. The schema coverage gap leaves the agent without essential invocation context.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The single required "id" parameter has 0% schema description coverage, and the description never explains what the id identifies or what format it takes. With no schema coverage, the description should compensate but does not.

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 names a specific verb ("Read") and resource ("ordered reference flow"), with additional scope via "capture provenance." However, domain terms like "reference flow" are not defined, and it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as create_flow or analyze_transition.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_flow, analyze_transition, or list_recordings. The read verb implies retrieval, but the description provides no conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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