Retrieves the AndroidManifest.xml content from a decompiled Android app, enabling inspection of permissions, components, and app metadata for reverse engineering or security analysis.
Retrieve and return the AndroidManifest.xml content.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided; the description only mentions retrieval without details on behavior (e.g., caching, format, size limits). The burden is high, and the description lacks sufficient disclosure.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence, front-loaded with the key information, and contains no redundant words. Every part earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given no parameters, the description is mostly adequate, but it lacks details about the output format (e.g., XML string vs parsed object) and does not leverage the existing output schema context to simplify further.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool has no parameters, and schema coverage is 100% (empty properties). The description adds minimal extra value ('AndroidManifest.xml content'), but baseline is 4 due to zero parameters.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action ('Retrieve and return') and the specific resource ('AndroidManifest.xml content'), distinguishing it from sibling tools that deal with classes, methods, or resources.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies usage for obtaining the manifest but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_resource_file' or 'get_main_activity_class'. No exclusions are stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.