NanoKVM MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the action ('Move mouse cursor') but does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether this requires specific permissions, if it affects other system states, or what the expected response format is. The description is minimal and lacks crucial operational details.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded, starting with the main purpose followed by parameter details. It uses two sentences efficiently, with no wasted words, though it could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points for parameters).

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 the tool's low complexity (2 simple parameters) and the presence of an output schema (which handles return values), the description is somewhat complete but lacks depth. It covers the basic action and parameters but misses behavioral context like error conditions or system dependencies, making it adequate but with clear gaps.

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 description adds significant meaning beyond the input schema, which has 0% schema description coverage. It explains that 'x' and 'y' are coordinates for absolute screen positioning, with 'x: X coordinate (0 = left edge)' and 'y: Y coordinate (0 = top edge)', clarifying the coordinate system and edge references not present in the schema.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Move') and resource ('mouse cursor'), and distinguishes it from siblings like 'nanokvm_click' or 'nanokvm_tap' by specifying absolute positioning rather than clicking or tapping actions.

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 mouse cursor to specific coordinates, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'nanokvm_click' (for clicking) or 'nanokvm_scroll' (for scrolling). It provides basic context but lacks explicit exclusions or comparisons.

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