flutter-orchestrator

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

generate_flutter_golden_tests

Generates golden snapshot tests for Flutter widgets across light and dark modes on phone and tablet viewports.

Instructions

Generates multi-device golden snapshot test suites for Flutter widgets across Light/Dark modes, phone, and tablet viewports.

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": {
      "screenName": "<screenName>"
    },
    "name": "generate_flutter_golden_tests"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`screenName`	Yes	Name of the screen widget class (e.g. 'DashboardScreen').
`testThemes`	No
`widgetName`	No	Name of the widget to snapshot.	Screen

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 23, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It does not disclose that golden tests are baseline snapshots that may become brittle or require updating when UI changes, and doesn't mention whether it creates files or requires an existing widget. Only states generation, not side effects.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

One concise sentence with clear purpose, front-loaded. No wasted words. Could list generated files but not required.

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?

Adequate for basic generation but missing details: effect on existing golden files, whether it runs them, and per-device configuration output. No output schema forces more burden; description doesn't cover edge cases.

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 covers screenName and widgetName with descriptions, but testThemes lacks description (only default). Description doesn't clarify that testThemes controls the test matrix. With 67% coverage, description adds minimal value beyond schema.

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?

Clear verb+resource: generates golden snapshot tests for Flutter widgets. It specifies the matrix (Light/Dark, phone/tablet) which distinguishes it from generate_and_run_flutter_tests, though it doesn't explicitly name that sibling.

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?

Implies usage for golden snapshot generation but lacks explicit when-to-use vs generate_and_run_flutter_tests. Sibling list hints at alternatives but no guidance on selecting this one.

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