Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ibmi-mcp

ibmi-mcp

by WhitehornLtd
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

set_cursor

Position the cursor at a specified row and column on the 5250 terminal. Returns the updated screen state after repositioning.

Instructions

Position the cursor at the specified location.

Args: row: Row number (1-based, top row is 1). col: Column number (1-based, leftmost column is 1).

Returns the updated screen state.

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": {
      "row": "<row>",
      "col": "<col>"
    },
    "name": "set_cursor"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
rowYes
colYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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 return value ('updated screen state') but does not mention side effects like clearing selections or error behavior for invalid coordinates.

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?

The description is extremely concise: two sentences with a clear docstring-style parameter list. No redundant information.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple setter tool, the description covers purpose, parameters, and return value. It could mention the environment (terminal) but is adequate given siblings provide context.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, but the description adds 1-based indexing details for both row and col, which is not in the schema. This adds meaningful guidance, though bounds are missing.

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 clearly states the action ('Position') and resource ('cursor'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like send_key and read_screen by specifying it moves the cursor, not sending keys or reading content.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description implies when to use (to set cursor position) but does not explicitly exclude cases or mention alternatives among siblings. However, the context is clear enough.

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