Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Mobile Design MCP

Mobile Design MCP

by noxpublishing
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

mobbin_list_tools

Read-only

Lists available Mobbin MCP tool schemas for an authenticated account, enabling discovery of supported mobile design research actions after OAuth sign-in.

Instructions

Discover the official account-connected Mobbin MCP tool schemas. Requires OAuth sign-in.

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": "mobbin_list_tools"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/openWorld/destructive, so the bar is lower; the description still adds two non-obvious facts: OAuth sign-in is required, and the results are 'account-connected' (i.e., vary by authenticated account). It omits any note on output shape or call cost, but adds real value beyond the 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 short sentences, zero filler, with the action front-loaded and the auth prerequisite following. Nothing is redundant.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-param, no-output-schema tool this is close to adequate, but the description never says what comes back (a list of tool schemas/names) or how it feeds into 'mobbin_call', leaving the discovery-to-invocation workflow implicit in a crowded sibling set.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. Nothing in the schema needs explanation, and the description correctly implies the call takes no arguments.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a concrete verb+resource: discover the Mobbin MCP tool schemas. It is distinguishable from sibling 'mobbin_call' (which presumably invokes a Mobbin tool) by the word 'schemas', but the description never names or contrasts that sibling, and 'discover' is softer than 'list'/'retrieve'.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the discovery step before 'mobbin_call', and the OAuth prerequisite is stated. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not, and no reference to the sibling tool that consumes the result.

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