Air carrier Captain reported the TOREO 1A STAR to MMSM is not visible on the electronic chart selection of the STARS initial page on the Jeppesen EFB.

Narrative

At approximately XA:25; received clearance from Mexico Control to turn to 195 heading and descend from FL360 to FL310 for spacing. About XA:30 we were level at FL310 and was given direct VILSI which was complied with. Next we were given direct TOREO followed within a moment to descend TOREO 1A maintain 16000. I read it back to descend via the arrival maintain 16000 and finished executing the original direct TOREO clearance into the Control Display Unit (CDU). We had entered and briefed pre-descent the TOREO 1R about 160 NM back which was originally filed and for the 4C ILS indicated by the ATIS. As you can already see; we had expectation bias started.We continued to descend expecting to cross TOREO at FL230 on the TOREO 1R Arrival. About 10 NM before TOREO in which VNAV showed us doing what we thought we were supposed to be doing Mexico Control said it appeared that we were not going to cross at FL180. We stated; It shows on the arrival to cross TOREO at FL230;" and then communications between us got worse. I repeated it says FL230 and he repeated no and asked what "chart" was I using which I gave him arrival on plate 10-2B. He asked which chart again and I repeated plate 10-2B on Jeppesen plates and I asking my FO what he thinks he means and he couldn't either. Mexico Control repeated that it is the wrong chart followed by him saying I-A-P chart. I looked at the FO and he wasn't sure either. The controller was using the English he knew when it finally hit me we were on a different arrival than what was cleared and started quickly looking for the TOREO 1A vs. what was expectation biased for 1R as filed.The TOREO 1A is not visible on the electronic chart selection under the STARS initial page selection in Jeppesen EFB. You have to select the STAR button which shows a couple of TOREO arrivals but no TOREO 1A. The TOREO 1A is hidden in the STAR section on the RNAV arrivals (runways 04 C/L) page. TOREO 1A is not labeled on the initial STARS selection which confounded me and the flying pilot as we searched frantically. I had the Jeppesen EFB looking for it while I was trying to work with the Center on where we should be and the flying pilot searched the CDU. Mexico Control appeared tired of us and then handed us over to MMSM Approach without really helping in correcting our situation further. Most of this back-and-forth chewed up distance we didn't have to work with. Approach quickly cleared us to VINRI which took some work on getting the spelling and was found by the flying pilot going through the CDU which was on the TOREO 1A on its transition selection on the CDU. We continued without further incident to a landing.Cause: Expectation bias of what arrival we were going to get versus what we were assigned in the few miles to the initial fix.Language barrier of not understanding what the true point was. Was never given the arrival a second time by name but got into a discussion about wrong "charts;" adding confusion to the situation. Normally I request clarification if in doubt but in this instance; even using my FO for validation on what he is saying and meaning failed in his non-standard controller terms he used. We were not being understood in both directions.The TOREO 1A arrival not being labeled in the initial STAR section with the other TOREO arrivals EFB is a recipe for this mistake happening again by others.There were about three rolling delays during my rest period proceeding this leg and my body not adjusting to those changes well by the end of this leg began to show. Definitely not at the top of my game by the end of this leg. Probably should have called fatigued but I felt OK at the beginning. I went from a scheduled 17-hour rest to a moving 53 hours due to delays and with three rolling ones for about the last approximate 24 - 30 hours prior. Hard to adjust for that despite the cumulative total rest. Even harder to justify it to someone. Suggestions: Expectation bias is hard to work around. We have to brief ahead of time (pre-descent) to get it reliably covered as trained. So you end up briefing way ahead which sets you up for expectations of events and then we get it switched literally a few miles from the initial fix kind of sets you up for it. Better awareness is about the only thing that comes to mind as a fix.Language barriers are a constant in our sector of aviation. We were definitely not on the same page literally and figuratively. Normally I request clarification if in doubt but in this instance; even using my FO for validation on what he is saying and meaning failed. Standard phrases would have solved a lot of this.Location of the arrivals in the EFB should be listed better on the initial STAR page. I don't think most pilots should spend a day memorizing all the plates of a destination. Especially with many airports having a multitude of plates making it unreasonable or possible. Both my FO and I missing this leads me to think this is not the first time this has happened.Fatigue is insidious. While I had in total 53 hours off for rest; it was not scheduled and changed. I should have called fatigued when I woke up way earlier than the wake up call."