Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SapperMCP

SapperMCP

by MasterX1582
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Double Click

double_click

Triggers a double-click, optionally at specified X/Y coordinates and mouse button, to open or activate items during desktop control tasks.

Instructions

Double-click, optionally at coordinates.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "double_click"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
xNo
yNo
buttonNoleft

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It hints that coordinates are optional (implying a click at the current cursor position when omitted), but says nothing about what double-clicking does at the OS level, whether it requires a focused target, or how the button parameter alters behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single short sentence with no filler, and the key qualifier (optional coordinates) is front-loaded. Brevity here is appropriate, though it is under-specified rather than genuinely tight.

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

Completeness2/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. Still, for a tool with three undocumented parameters and zero annotations, the description is far too thin — the button argument, coordinate system, and behavior when coordinates are omitted all go unexplained.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% across three parameters. The description covers only x/y as "coordinates" and never explains the coordinate origin (screen vs. window-relative) or units, and it entirely omits the "button" parameter, which defaults to "left" but could accept other values.

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

Purpose3/5

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

"Double-click" names a specific action, and "optionally at coordinates" adds the only real scope detail beyond the name/title. However, the phrasing is close to a restatement of the tool name and does nothing to distinguish this from the sibling "click" tool (e.g., single vs. double press semantics).

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer this over the sibling "click" tool, and no prerequisites such as needing a focused window or an active session. The agent is left to infer all selection logic.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools