replicant-mcp

gradle-test

Destructive

Run Android unit or connected tests and receive a test summary with IDs. Save or clear baselines to auto-detect regressions.

Instructions

Run tests. Returns summary with testId. With baseline, auto-detects regressions.

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": {
      "operation": "<operation>"
    },
    "name": "gradle-test"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`operation`	Yes
`module`	No
`filter`	No	e.g., 'LoginTest'
`taskName`	No	Task name for baseline operations. Defaults to operation name.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedv1.0.1Apr 2, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / filter / description

Previous value: -"Test filter (e.g., '*LoginTest*')"New value: +"e.g., '*LoginTest*'"

removedInput schema / properties / module / description
```
Removed value: -"Module path"
```

changedInput schema / properties / operation / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "unitTest",
-  "connectedTest"
-]New value: +[
+  "unitTest",
+  "connectedTest",
+  "saveBaseline",
+  "clearBaseline"
+]

addedInput schema / properties / taskName

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Task name for baseline operations. Defaults to operation name.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedv1.0.0Jan 21, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds the context of auto-detecting regressions with baseline, which provides additional behavioral insight beyond the annotations. However, it does not elaborate on side effects or destruction scope. No contradiction with annotations is present.

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?

The description is two sentences and front-loaded with the core action. It is efficient, though the phrase 'With baseline, auto-detects regressions' could potentially be integrated more succinctly. Still, it is notably concise and to the point.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should explain the return value in more detail. It only states 'Returns summary with testId,' leaving ambiguity about the summary content. Additionally, the description does not elaborate on when baseline is used or how regressions are detected, leaving gaps given the tool's complexity (4 parameters, destructive nature).

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?

The input schema has 50% description coverage, with descriptions for 'filter' and 'taskName'. The description adds no parameter-specific details beyond the schema. Baseline score is 3 given the moderate schema coverage, and the description does not compensate further.

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 'Run tests' as the primary action, explicitly mentions returning a summary with testId, and introduces baseline regression detection. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like gradle-build, gradle-get-details, or gradle-list, all of which have different purposes.

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?

The description implies usage for running tests and mentions baseline regression detection, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide when-not-to-use guidance. Some context is given, but it lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives.

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

Deploy Server