Move mouse cursor to normalized coordinates WITHOUT clicking.
nx, ny: float 0.0000–1.0000.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| nx | Yes | ||
| ny | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description clarifies the key behavior of not clicking and specifies the coordinate range (0.0000–1.0000). With no annotations, it carries the full burden and does so adequately, though it omits details like error handling or response.
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?
Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the action and key qualifier ('WITHOUT clicking'), with no unnecessary words.
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?
For a simple move command, the description fully covers purpose, coordinate system, and the important no-click behavior. Output schema exists so return values are not needed.
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?
With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds critical semantics: both parameters are normalized floats in [0,1], which the schema only lists as 'number' without constraints.
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 states the action ('Move mouse cursor to normalized coordinates') and specifies it does not click, clearly differentiating from siblings like 'click' or 'double_click'.
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 moving the cursor without clicking but does not explicitly state when to use or when to avoid, nor does it mention alternatives for clicking.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct action: clicks, screenshots (raw, corrected, calibration aids), keyboard input, mouse movement, scrolling, and corner calibration. There is no ambiguity between tools.
Tool names mix conventions: some are single verbs (click, scroll, key), some are verb_noun (move_mouse, set_corners, type_text), and some are longer phrases (take_screenshot_with_crosshair). Although readable, the inconsistency is notable.
With 12 tools, the server covers all essential interactions for camera-based screen control without being bloated or sparse. Each tool has a clear role.
The tool set covers clicking, typing, key combinations, mouse movement, scrolling, and multiple screenshot modes including calibration aids. Missing drag/swipe functionality is a minor gap.