Skip to main content
Glama

Glasswarp

by com.glasswarp

input.send_actions

Destructive

PREFERRED multi-step tool: run 1–10 predictable UI actions in one call (input.click_target, input.click_xy, input.type_text, input.send_keys, input.drag, input.scroll). Side effects: all actions execute on the remote desktop; fails fast before sending if any action is invalid. observe_after defaults true (verification observe: text+targets; set observe_image=true for JPEG). Do not batch across unpredictable waits (page loads, installers, modals) — single-step those. Prefer this over chaining solo click/type/keys tools.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionsYesOrdered actions (max 10); input.click_target needs target_id from latest screen.observe
session_idYesActive session id
observe_afterNoDefault true. When true, return a verification observe in the same result
observe_imageNoDefault false. When true with observe_after, include verification JPEG unless changed=false

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYesFalse when the tool failed
changedNoWhether the frame changed since last observe; null if unknown
messageYesHuman-readable observe summary / targets
has_imageNoTrue when a JPEG was included in the MCP content
native_widthNoNative capture width
native_heightNoNative capture height

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint, but the description adds details: all actions execute remotely, fails fast on invalid actions, observe_after defaults true, and observe_image behavior.

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?

Concise at ~60 words, front-loaded with key info, every sentence adds value, and structured logically.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the multi-step complexity, schema coverage, annotations, and presence of output schema, the description fully addresses purpose, usage, parameters, and behavior.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for all parameters. The description adds context beyond the schema, like click_target needing target_id from screen.observe and defaults for observe_after.

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 explicitly states it is a multi-step tool for running up to 10 predictable UI actions in one call, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like individual click/type/keys tools.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It provides explicit guidance: use for predictable actions, avoid batching across unpredictable waits, and prefer this over chaining solo tools.

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

All Glasswarp toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: session management, input methods, screen observation, demo retrieval, and rig listing. Descriptions explicitly state when to prefer one over another (e.g., click_target over click_xy, send_actions over chaining). No two tools overlap in functionality.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow the domain.verb_noun pattern (e.g., app.launch, input.click_target, session.start) with consistent snake_case. Verbs like launch, list, get, click, send, type, observe are clear actions, and the naming is predictable across the entire set.

Tool Count5/5

16 tools cover the full spectrum of remote desktop control: 2 for demos, 1 for rigs, 4 for sessions, 1 for screen, 7 for input, and 1 for app launching. Each tool is necessary and there is no redundancy; the count is well-scoped for the domain.

Completeness5/5

The tool set provides a complete lifecycle for remote desktop interaction: rig selection, session start/end, screen observation, all common input actions (click, type, scroll, drag, multi-step sequences), app launching, and demo retrieval. There are no obvious gaps for typical UI automation tasks.

Resources