x11-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

mouse_move

Move the agent's pointer to screen pixel coordinates (x, y) to position the cursor before clicking or interacting with the virtual desktop.

Instructions

Move the agent's pointer to screen pixel (x, y).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "x": "<x>",
      "y": "<y>"
    },
    "name": "mouse_move"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`x`	Yes
`y`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 23, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It says the pointer is moved but omits coordinate origin, whether the move is instantaneous, whether it affects focus/hover, and whether any buttons are pressed, though 'move' implies no click.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words; it states action and target immediately.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple two-parameter move tool with an output schema, the description covers the core action and coordinate space. However, with no annotations and no schema descriptions, it leaves origin/bounds and interaction side effects unspecified.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0% and both params are required, but the description adds that x/y are screen pixel coordinates, which is meaningful beyond the bare integer schema. It still does not define origin, bounds, or per-axis semantics.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb ('Move'), resource ('agent's pointer'), and target ('screen pixel (x, y)'), so the action is unambiguous. It does not explicitly contrast with click/drag/scroll siblings, so it falls short of the strongest sibling differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No when-to-use guidance or alternatives are given; it doesn't say to use this before click/drag or when not to use it. The usage is only inferable from the verb.

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